Drink Driving At Christmas.

[andy-hughes]

http://www.motoring.co.uk/car-news/drink-driving-at-xmas-750-000-expect-to-drive-while-over-limit_67071?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=motoring-161215-b


It appears that our culture of accepting arrest for drink-driving as an occupational hazard is not disappearing as quickly as we might hope.

My views on drink driving are very simple - zero tolerance, lifetime ban.

Any thoughts?

[Sqad]

My views:......zero tolerance.

Punishment: depending upon the individual circumstances.

[Baldric]

Zero tolerance and minimum 1 year ban, no exceptions.

[andy-hughes]

Sqad - //Punishment: depending upon the individual circumstances. //

That appears to suggest that there can be mitigating circomstances.

Personally, I disagree.

Drink and drive - get caught - get banned.

No exceptions.

[Retrochic]

many people driving to work after a Christmas party the night before would not pass a Breathalyzer if there was zero tolerance. Surely there has to be a little lee-way?

[Zacs-Master]

The 18% figure ties in with the RAC's findings too:
http://www.rac.co.uk/pdfs/report-on-motoring/rac-rom-2015
page 84.

Pretty shocking.

[Sqad]

A-H.....no, I disagree.

The punishment has to be blood level of alcohol, related and also the past history of the offender has to be taken into consideration.

[sunny-dave]

I hope by zero tolerance you don't mean "zero alcohol" - that is virtually unenforceable in practice and leads to all sorts of 'exceptions' being exploited by expensive lawyers.

The current limit is (possibly) too high - other countries have one around 60% of the English figure - so a reduction might make sense, but not to zero.

[andy-hughes]

Retrochic - //many people driving to work after a Christmas party the night before would not pass a Breathalyzer if there was zero tolerance. Surely there has to be a little lee-way? //

I disagree.

I think we need to move away from the perception that driving is a God-given right for everyone - as is alcohol consumption.

Taking control of a lethal machine with the possibility of impairment through alcohol should be against the law.

If you are going to drive tomorrow, don't drink tonight - it's that simple.

[Baldric]

///Surely there has to be a little lee-way?///

No if you're above the limit, you get done, no exceptions.

[ummmm]

There has to be some leeway as some medications contain alcohol.

[Retrochic]

andy - are you seriously suggesting that if one wants a couple of glasses of wine with their evening meal, then they need to take the next day off work to avoid getting breathalyzed? You can fail a 'zero tolerance' breathalyzer if you swig too much mouthwash (so I've been told)

[Baldric]

Then I suggest the driver takes his/her medicine into account.

[retrocop]

Retrochic
Good to see posting again.

[Retrochic]

Baldric " No if you're above the limit, you get done, no exceptions.:

pardon? no one is saying there should be a leeway if you are ' over the limit' -thats the whole point -with zero tolerance' there is no 'over the limit'. many meds have alcohol in them

[cactusdriver]

There is already plenty of leeway - if you are under 80mg/100ml in England you don't get done. I think Scotland was right to reduce to 50mg/100mg

[andy-hughes]

Retrochic - //andy - are you seriously suggesting that if one wants a couple of glasses of wine with their evening meal, then they need to take the next day off work to avoid getting breathalyzed?//

That is exactly what I am suggesting.

Driving is not a right, nor is drinking, and we should stop acting as though they are.

[retrocop]

A little more publicity about driving under the influence of certain prescribed medication as well as recreational drugs wouldn't go amiss either.

[cactusdriver]

Er 50mg/100ml

[Retrochic]

Thanks retrocop I bunged the gnomes a couple of mince pies laced with a micky finn and made a run for it .