Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Tue Sep 22, 2020 12:14

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 96 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:30 
Offline
Police Officer
Police Officer

Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 22:37
Posts: 279
Location: Warrington
I wouldnt mind putting money on it that the Government will introduce a graduated fixed penalty scheme like they have in places like Holland,and just like the speed awareness courses. If you are stopped and you are between a certain amount of alcohol level then you get fined X amount then the next level then we arrive at the present legal limit of 35 over that and your belly is against the charge office counter or two fixed penaltys within a set period you get taken in.

Its another way for the Government to get money into the pot as we know they need it at this moment,and I wouldnt mind betting thats why they have been keeping tabs on recent years breathalyzer figures working out whether the negatives ie the ones under 35mgs would give them a fair income,they say that all this is done in the interest of road safety,my ar*e.
Stephen


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:48 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4042
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
malcolmw wrote:
Surely it must be reasonable for a citizen to be able to buy a machine to evaluate breath alcohol level to establish if they are under or over the limit. Am I right in thinking that such devices are not allowed to be sold on the grounds that it would encourage drinking right up to the limit irrespective of impairment?


Which makes as much sense as not allowing speedometers on cars because it encourages driving up to the speed limit.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 14, 2010 12:51 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6735
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
malcolmw wrote:
Surely it must be reasonable for a citizen to be able to buy a machine to evaluate breath alcohol level to establish if they are under or over the limit. Am I right in thinking that such devices are not allowed to be sold on the grounds that it would encourage drinking right up to the limit irrespective of impairment?

No, they are freely available. See, for example:

http://www.ukbreathalysers.com/

I think pubs have been dissuaded from installing coin-operated breath testing machines for the reasons you give.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 14, 2010 13:02 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
Ah, you pipped me to it on the avalability Peter but I'll post my effort anyway...

dcbwhaley wrote:
malcolmw wrote:
Surely it must be reasonable for a citizen to be able to buy a machine to evaluate breath alcohol level to establish if they are under or over the limit. Am I right in thinking that such devices are not allowed to be sold on the grounds that it would encourage drinking right up to the limit irrespective of impairment?


Which makes as much sense as not allowing speedometers on cars because it encourages driving up to the speed limit.
I think you're stretching the like-for-like to the unalike there I’m affriad. There is a correlation between the amount of alcohol in your blood which doesn’t exist when it comes to speed killing.

Even the law recognises that putting different limits for different situations should apply, (albeit absurdly so). I don’t think anyone, even a traf pol with the blues and twos going, would get away with being drunk like they can and do with speeding and, my old favorite, insurance companies agree with me ;) So those are my quick reasons for disagreeing although I’m sure there are more.

When I used to drink during the week I would only do so up to about 10:30 p.m. and only if I was not driving early the next morning in my work duties. Also, I wouldn’t drive to my work in the morning; I would always jog to my work base or cycle along the canal.

I do feel a little sorry for those caught just over the limit the next day in so much as they are not deliberately trying to flout the law by getting back from the pub knowingly having had too much. I think many drivers honestly don’t realise that you can still be over the next day.

There are many breath testers on the market for the public now, as a quick Google shows. Some are not that expensive and boast ‘police like’ accuracy. So if someone is going to make a habit of it, it’s a small investment for some peace of mind. Personally, if I had one, I would err on the side of anything it showed remotely close to the limit being too close for comfort to drive. Better a taxi for one night than for the next 365 days…

As an aside, and I know I stand to be shot down in flames for it, but lowering the limit is likely to hit an already flagging pub trade. (Somewhere about 40 a week closing?).

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 14, 2010 14:32 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4042
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
Big Tone wrote:
dcbwhaley wrote:
Which makes as much sense as not allowing speedometers on cars because it encourages driving up to the speed limit.
I

think you're stretching the like-for-like to the unalike there I’m affriad. There is a correlation between the amount of alcohol in your blood which doesn’t exist when it comes to speed killing.


It is a poor correlation. But the analogy is accurate. If the law sets a numerical limit on behaviour then natural justice insists thatone must be able to ascertain when one has reached that limit.

I do have breath tester and have never been near the limit on the morning after. But I have had hangovers so severe that I would not consider driving despite being under the limit.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 14, 2010 15:16 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
Your analogy discounts the massive variables there are on the road when it comes to speed; here I go again.. Weather, visability, uphill or down, condition of vehicle etc. etc.

The only variable with drink is whether you become more or less pissed which is directly proportional to your ability to drive safely.

I’ve “ascertained” a terminal speed of 120mph along the drag strip at Long Marston, near Stratford, because the conditions were safe compared to 20mph past a school where children are present. In fact, you couldn’t pay me enough to go more than about 20mph in such circumstances but I’d pay good money to go on the drag strip again. Image

There are situations, which I’ve certainly had, where a quick burst above the speed limit has gotten me away from a bad situation; for example being clipped from a motorist pulling out of a junction who hasn’t noticed me on my motorbike. I can’t imagine a situation where another vodka would ever help in a more inevitable road safety matter, other than numbing me to the pain after a collision.

I would go as far as saying that 'Drink Kills' would be quite an appropriate slogan; certainly much more so than 'Speed Kills' has ever been.

So you’ve left me a little confused this time bud. Of course you could argue I’m easily confused ;)

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 14, 2010 17:53 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4042
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
Big Tone wrote:
Your analogy discounts the massive variables there are on the road when it comes to speed; here I go again.. Weather, visability, uphill or down, condition of vehicle etc. etc.


I suspect that you are being deliberately obtuse to wind me up :D

I am not discussing safety or the effects of speed or drink. I am discussing jurisprudence. If the law says thou shalt not have more than x thingies per wotsit then I expect to have ready access to a t/w meter. For the legal establishment to say that such a meter might encourage me to approach x t/w is wrong. If they don't want me to approach x t/w they should set the limit lower.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown


Last edited by dcbwhaley on Mon Jun 14, 2010 20:51, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 14, 2010 18:33 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
Well now you really have confused me :? I never said all that! Turn the wing nut on the G-Clamp across your head another half turn like I have to do sometimes :D

I recognise the first line as something in this thread that I said.

The second sentence is a quote from me from another thread long ago, which you may have tried to put in to bat back at me. Fair play but it still looks out of place because the quotations are out of wack.

And the third part I'm still trying to digest but I'm off to Ceroc in a bit so will have to analyse it while I'm cutting a rug...

Image

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2010 09:48 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
dcbwhaley wrote:
Big Tone wrote:
Your analogy discounts the massive variables there are on the road when it comes to speed; here I go again.. Weather, visability, uphill or down, condition of vehicle etc. etc.

I suspect that you are being deliberately obtuse to wind me up :D

I am not discussing safety or the effects of speed or drink. I am discussing jurisprudence. If the law says thou shalt not have more than x thingies per wotsit then I expect to have ready access to a t/w meter. For the legal establishment to say that such a meter might encourage me to approach x t/w is wrong. If they don't want me to approach x t/w they should set the limit lower.
Ah, I’m up to speed now. (ta for the edit ;) ) Of course if I were allowed to speed I could have got there quicker. :D

I see what you’re saying and it’s hard to say what the human response would be I think. I can only speak for myself on this which would be to say "sod this for a game of soldiers, I think I’ll just stay in and have a beer or two which saves my wallet, saves my licence and stuffs all the pubs and wine bars thereby putting people out of work to boot".

If I want a bit of a knees-up with some pals they are welcome to stay over, yourself included - but not in my bed. :P And I'm not playing spin the bottle either :lol:

Seriously, I think it will just make people stay in more. Taxis are too expensive and public transport is useless where I am. :(

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2010 13:22 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4042
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
Big Tone wrote:
Seriously, I think it will just make people stay in more. Taxis are too expensive and public transport is useless where I am. :(


Most of the p!$$ heads I know, self included, walk to the pub. Or I sometimes cycle. Mind you having half a dozen good pubs within half an hours walk does help.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2010 18:43 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 19:08
Posts: 3434
Personally I think one of the following two may happen a lot more than may be expected.

Firstly, people who drink about a pint and a half now ,to stay below the present limit, will continue to do the same and take a chance that their driving will pass scrutiny if followed.

Secondly, some people who try and stay below the limit now, may drink even more, thinking that if I'm going to get stopped it might as well be for 3 or 4 pints as the one and a half I drink anyway.

The second is obviously going to make the roads MORE dangerous but then, what has happened with speed limits being reduced and cameras???

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2010 22:33 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6735
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Big Tone wrote:
Seriously, I think it will just make people stay in more. Taxis are too expensive and public transport is useless where I am. :(

The behaviour we're looking at is calling in at pubs for a couple of pints - nobody's ever going to get a taxi for that. But they may well conclude that it's not worth it at all if they can only have one.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 15:05 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
PeterE wrote:
The behaviour we're looking at is calling in at pubs for a couple of pints - nobody's ever going to get a taxi for that. But they may well conclude that it's not worth it at all if they can only have one.
Indeedy, but also the price I feel.

I don't know about other Cities but what led me to stop going to pubs and start drinking at home a few years ago was, if I break it down: -

Taxi fare to local, there and back ~£10 to £12. Multiply the time they say they'll arive in minutes by a factor of 3 and add half an hour, unless it's nearing 11:00 p.m in which case add an hour or just start walking. Price of a typical pint around Brum ~£3 to £3.50 (x2 or x3) = say £9

So I can either blow 20 quid for a night at the pub or buy a four-pack at a total cost of £3.79 and put my feet up at home reading the paper or watching the box.

I rest my case...

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 18:08 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4042
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
Big Tone wrote:
So I can either blow 20 quid for a night at the pub or buy a four-pack at a total cost of £3.79 and put my feet up at home reading the paper or watching the box. I rest my case...


The case being that you have no taste :D Decent beer is only available in pubs. Not quite true - some of the Belgian bottles are good but they cost as much as pub beer.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 18:10 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 14:47
Posts: 1659
Location: A Dark Desert Highway
fisherman wrote:
As I have said this is based on gut feeling and concerns drivers who try to obey the law. Knowing that the current law permits driving after drinking, they limit their consumption of alcohol to a level they believe is within the law and drive believing that they are legally OK to be at the wheel. Only to find to their very considerable cost that they are not. A sunday morning conviction following a heavy saturday night is a common scenario. From what I have seen, I believe that many of these people would obey a law that says, in effect, that you can't drink and drive. That includes walking to the paper shop on sunday and not driving until monday.


A conviction for drink driving, even at a just over the limit level, can be a life changing experience. That seems to me to be unfair when it is based on a level that the offender is unable to determine for himself.


Bingo, we have a winner.

you go out on the lash with your mates, as is perfectly normal in civilised society. Taxi's are used to and from the evening proceedings as anyone with sense would do.

Tomorrow comes and when are you fit/legal to drive? It is a complete lottery.

A freak gust of wind propelled me above the speed limit earlier today, I knew I was over the speed limit because a dial in front of me said I was. Had I have been stopped it would have been £60 and 3 points. Annoying, but no big deal.

You have no idea whether or not you are safe/legal to drive the day after a night on the lash, but go 1mg over the limit and it is bye, bye license. I have said before that there should be a more graduated punishment system for drink driving.

I am not for one minute suggesting or endorsing drink driving, but nailing some one at the lower end of the drink driving scale seems a bit harsh when there are plenty of people that continue to drive post ban for being way over the limit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 18:46 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6735
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
fisherman wrote:
As I have said this is based on gut feeling and concerns drivers who try to obey the law. Knowing that the current law permits driving after drinking, they limit their consumption of alcohol to a level they believe is within the law and drive believing that they are legally OK to be at the wheel. Only to find to their very considerable cost that they are not. A sunday morning conviction following a heavy saturday night is a common scenario. From what I have seen, I believe that many of these people would obey a law that says, in effect, that you can't drink and drive. That includes walking to the paper shop on sunday and not driving until monday.

But even with a law that says in effect you can't drink anything immediately before driving, you still have to make an assessment of how long you need to wait after having a drink (or ten drinks) before you can drive again. A lower limit does not make that any simpler. How would the guy you refer to know he was OK to drive on Monday?

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 19:28 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4042
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
PeterE wrote:
But even with a law that says in effect you can't drink anything immediately before driving, you still have to make an assessment of how long you need to wait after having a drink (or ten drinks) before you can drive again. A lower limit does not make that any simpler. How would the guy you refer to know he was OK to drive on Monday?


With one of the readily available breathalysers http://www.ukbreathalysers.com/

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 19:34 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member

Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 13:50
Posts: 2643
Whenever you see reports about drink-drive accidents (and there have been a few of these trotted out in news reports about lowering the limit) they almost invariably involve drivers who are 2, 3 or even 4x over the limit.
So what possible good can come out of lowering the limit?
I fear that the main effects will be many more ordinarily law-abiding drivers losing their licences and livelihoods simply because they're not aware that they're still over the limit, many more pubs going out of business, culminating in widespread disrespect for the law.
And those who deliberately drink and drive will continue doing so, will continue crashing and killing people, except that they'll now be 4, 5 or 6x over the limit.

What I find particularly disturbing (besides the fact that they want to retain the minimum penalty) is that they want to abolish the second test - giving the reason that your alcohol level may have dropped below the limit by the time you reach the police station. But isn't it reasonable to assume that a falling alcohol limit is indicative of someone who had their last drink quite some time ago? Why are they going all-out to criminalise such people?

BTW I saw on the BBC website that they have considerably more drink-drive accidents per head of population in the Czech Republic than we do - despite them having a zero limit.

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 19:55 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
adam.L wrote:
I have said before that there should be a more graduated punishment system for drink driving. I am not for one minute suggesting or endorsing drink driving, but nailing some one at the lower end of the drink driving scale seems a bit harsh when there are plenty of people that continue to drive post ban for being way over the limit.
:clap: ME TOO Adam! I've said this before here. One fraction under - on your way sir. One fraction over - DRUNK! PISSED! INEBRIATED! DANGEROUS CHILD KILLER! How can that possibly make sense to anyone :?

If we talk in terms of more safe verses less safe, I think we can agree on an important difference when it comes to safety and drinking...

A newbie driver of 17 years old drinks one pint of bitter and sends him stir fry crazy. (He’s not used to drinking but nonetheless still under the limit).

An experienced driver, and seasoned drinker, whom may be just over the limit does the exact opposite and thinks “I’ve had a drink or two so I will take extra care”.

Dare I suggest that the American sobriety test is both relevant and, in many ways, more indicative of who is or isn’t more likely to go on a alcohol-fuelled kill crazy driving rampage and be more aware of the surrounds.

This ‘one size fits all’ black or white approach rarely works but just like everything else today it ‘s used as a yardstick which should not be a yard so much as a variable tape measure..

Oh, and I second everything you just said Pete!!!

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Last edited by Big Tone on Wed Jun 16, 2010 19:56, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 19:56 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4042
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
Pete317 wrote:
Whenever you see reports about drink-drive accidents (and there have been a few of these trotted out in news reports about lowering the limit) they almost invariably involve drivers who are 2, 3 or even 4x over the limit.


Indeed. There is a a small hard-core of drinkers who completely ignore the limit. As you say most of the accidents are caused by people in that group.

Quote:
What I find particularly disturbing (besides the fact that they want to retain the minimum penalty) is that they want to abolish the second test - giving the reason that your alcohol level may have dropped below the limit by the time you reach the police station.


They also gave the reason that modern breath testers are extremely reliable and accurate. Like speed cameras but without the secondary check. :headbash:

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 96 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.486s | 12 Queries | GZIP : Off ]