Jump to content
guinness

new traffic laws

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Babstreefern said:

Death is also draconian, but it happens all the time.  It doesn't need to be helped by stupid people drinking.  

Death is a fact of life. I have a small glass of wine with lunch and then drive, but I am not stupid. I have passed the IAM motorcycle test so take my driving and riding seriously. 
For the benefit of AJG, I was also a pilot and know the rules - but your ignorance of the rules regarding alcohol has already been pointed out. 
Many people get over emotional with this subject. The simple fact is that driving holds a degree of risk, as do many things in life. We have all seen many people who aren’t fully alert or can’t drive properly even when stone cold sober. If you believe a zero limit for alcohol is what is required then I suggest you would also accept mandatory testing for driving competence every few years. As we age our reactions slow and our situational awareness decreases. Should we mandate additional testing? Or perhaps a more draconian solution would be to ban people from driving after a certain age? I certainly wouldn’t want either and am more than happy to accept the minuscule risk from someone driving after a single drink. 
As has been pointed out, the effect of the reduction in the drink drive limit in Scotland has been statistically zero; in fact, given traffic volumes in Scotland the accident rate actually went up following its introduction in 2014. 

Edited by Fat Albert
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Fat Albert said:

Death is a fact of life. I have a small glass of wine with lunch and then drive, but I am not stupid. I have passed the IAM motorcycle test so take my driving and riding seriously. 
For the benefit of AJG, I was also a pilot and know the rules - but your ignorance of the rules regarding alcohol has already been pointed out. 
Many people get over emotional with this subject. The simple fact is that driving holds a degree of risk, as do many things in life. We have all seen many people who aren’t fully alert or can’t drive properly even when stone cold sober. If you believe a zero limit for alcohol is what is required then I suggest you would also accept mandatory testing for driving competence every few years. As we age our reactions slow and our situational awareness decreases. Should we mandate additional testing? Or perhaps a more draconian solution would be to ban people from driving after a certain age? I certainly wouldn’t want either and am more than happy to accept the minuscule risk from someone driving after a single drink. 
As has been pointed out, the effect of the reduction in the drink drive limit in Scotland has been statistically zero; in fact, given traffic volumes in Scotland the accident rate actually went up following its introduction in 2014. 

I acknowledged I was wrong straight away on the pilot levels and stated it may have been a club rather than law.

 

Yes I agree with retesting of drivers, I too took the IAM test at age 19 and went on to ROSPA and several more in my younger years. It is true that reactions slow but I think hazard perception improves with experience which goes some way to counter the slowed reactions.

 

Death is indeed a fact of life but death being caused by someones'need' for alcohol is not acceptable in my book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I read that a poll showed that a majority of drivers would want a no drink drive laws .

 

It has been proven over and over again that driving under the influence of alcohol effects people's reactions .

 

My wife does not drink and the first thing I did when we met was teach her to drive .

 

 

Dave

Edited by CommanderDave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, AJGalaxy2012 said:

Death is indeed a fact of life but death being caused by someones'need' for alcohol is not acceptable in my book.

That’s a completely ridiculous thing to say. Perhaps we should ban driving after lunch when it is also a known fact that our reactions and alertness levels are lower than normal. No, let’s be fair, only after a big lunch as a sandwich would probably  be fine. But how would we measure it?  Or what about when we are tired, another well known cause of accidents? Tachos in private vehicles perhaps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, CommanderDave said:

I read that a poll showed that a majority of drivers would want a no drink drive laws .

 

It has been proven over and over again that driving under the influence of alcohol effects people's reactions .

 

My wife does not drink and the first thing I did when we met was teach her to drive .

 

 

Dave

If you ask the right questions a poll can show whatever you want it to

  • Like 1
  • +1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, CommanderDave said:

It has been proven over and over again that driving under the influence of alcohol effects people's reactions .

It has been proven over and over again that a wide range of factors affect people’s reactions. 
Certain peoples’ reactions are much better than others, and their reactions would probably be better than a lot of people even after 1 drink. It is simply far too simplistic, and unworkable, to make the level zero. 

Edited by Fat Albert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Fat Albert said:

It has been proven over and over again that a wide range of factors affect people’s reactions. 
Certain peoples’ reactions are much better than others, and their reactions would probably be better than a lot of people even after 1 drink. It is simply far too simplistic, and unworkable, to make the level zero. 

 

A number of countries have a no drink drive policy ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, CommanderDave said:

 

A number of countries have a no drink drive policy ?

Russia and some Eastern European countries have a 0 limit. Several other countries have an age related 0, or near 0, limit for young and inexperienced drivers and some also have a 0 limit for drivers of commercial vehicles.

The greater majority of European countries have a lower prescribed limit than GB.

Edited by Legal Eagle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Fat Albert said:

That’s a completely ridiculous thing to say. Perhaps we should ban driving after lunch when it is also a known fact that our reactions and alertness levels are lower than normal. No, let’s be fair, only after a big lunch as a sandwich would probably  be fine. But how would we measure it?  Or what about when we are tired, another well known cause of accidents? Tachos in private vehicles perhaps?

There are many things that affect the danger / potential danger caused by drivers. One thing is guaranteed is alcohol does affect your ability to drive, no matter what the circumstances it only makes matters worse so make it zero and make an improvement. There is as I'm sure you know a sweet spot where a critical amount of alcohol actually improves driving ability but it's tiny, different for everyone so therefore too complicated to implement.

 

Make it black and white, no grey areas dont drink and drive.

  • +1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

As someone with nearly 30 years of practical experience of actually enforcing the drink driving law and, more pertinently, first hand experience of dealing with serious and fatal RTC’s (AND the ongoing aftermath which lasts for many months) I am going to give MY view.

 

Its not how much alcohol affects your ability to drive, it’s  how little. 

 

Alcohol affects different people in different ways.

 

I have dealt with a driver who was 4 times over the limit. His driving gave no indication whatsoever of his intoxication, and neither did his speech or demeanour. He was an alcoholic.  Conversely I also dealt with a vicars wife who was virtually legless, she had consumed a single glass of sherry! Her blood test showed she was well under the legal limit for driving! 

 

My personal view is that there does need to be a limit, and the current level appears to be about right and until some unequivocal scientific evidence comes to light to lower it then it should remain as it is. The evidence from Scotland shows that a lower limit has no discernible effect on the number of RTC’s  

 

VERY few RTC’s are caused by the driver being intoxicated. The vast majority are caused by sober drivers, so maybe THEY are the ones we should take off the road?? Not a serious suggestion, but if you rely JUST on statistics then the sober ones cause the most collisions! 

 

If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

 

Drug Driving is far more of a problem these days, cannabis stays in your system for a fortnight. ‘Nuff said? 

 

Andy

Edited by Mr Plodd
  • Like 4
  • +1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Fat Albert said:

That’s a completely ridiculous thing to say. Perhaps we should ban driving after lunch when it is also a known fact that our reactions and alertness levels are lower than normal. No, let’s be fair, only after a big lunch as a sandwich would probably  be fine. But how would we measure it?  Or what about when we are tired, another well known cause of accidents? Tachos in private vehicles perhaps?

 C'mon Albert who's being ridiculous now with your "sandwich scenario". The Drink Driving Issue is a very hot tattie for many especially when they have lost family members due to a drunk driver.

 

I have had shared experience as a Retained Firefighter when attending RTC's due to the "Bevie". The rise in Drug Driving in my book is a bigger issue. I was astonnished  what I witnessed in the city when pub crawling with the Troops at our Christmas night out.

Young Team cueing up outside the toilet cubicles others openly snorting their muck as if they were having a fag. Needless to say my day out on the town is nearing an all time end after what I witnessed and what about the many other drivers on our roads who are on medication and continue to drive against Doctors orders again resulting in fatalities ?

 

Don't think anyone is being ridiculous just worried and concerned at maybe one of their own could be a statistic. Road users have a Duty of Care at all times in my book and anything that endangers the ability to be safe whilst driving is an absolute no no. Be it using a phone ,smoking a fag or having a glass of wine with your meal with the Sunday roast they are jeopardising other road users safety.

 

GAS ....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, AJGalaxy2012 said:

Make it black and white, no grey areas dont drink and drive.

The evidence from Scotland doesn’t support this analysis; there is no case for a zero limit. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The government has to make laws based on evidence.  A zero limit won't cut the accident rate and will further harm the hospitality trade.

  • +1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Grumpy Auld Smeesh said:

 C'mon Albert who's being ridiculous now with your "sandwich scenario". The Drink Driving Issue is a very hot tattie for many especially when they have lost family members due to a drunk driver.

 

I have had shared experience as a Retained Firefighter when attending RTC's due to the "Bevie". The rise in Drug Driving in my book is a bigger issue. I was astonnished  what I witnessed in the city when pub crawling with the Troops at our Christmas night out.

Young Team cueing up outside the toilet cubicles others openly snorting their muck as if they were having a fag. Needless to say my day out on the town is nearing an all time end after what I witnessed and what about the many other drivers on our roads who are on medication and continue to drive against Doctors orders again resulting in fatalities ?

 

Don't think anyone is being ridiculous just worried and concerned at maybe one of their own could be a statistic. Road users have a Duty of Care at all times in my book and anything that endangers the ability to be safe whilst driving is an absolute no no. Be it using a phone ,smoking a fag or having a glass of wine with your meal with the Sunday roast they are jeopardising other road users safety.

 

GAS ....

 

I was being intentionally ridiculous; sorry you missed my sarcasm. 

If you want a literal view, read Mr Plodd’s post which pretty much sums up my opinion.  
I absolutely agree all road users have a duty of care and I take mine seriously, but a balanced and unemotional approach is needed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Much noise is made by the media on the increase of drug driving, based on figures obtained by FOI requests from Police. The number of tests and consequent positive tests is increasing at (an alarming) rate. But putting the hype to one side, it is only in the past five or six years that reliable  roadside drug test devices have been readily available to Police Forces, and as the practicioners get more used to them they are more prepared to use them... So taking that into account even if the actual number of drivers under the influence of drugs had remained a constant, the testing and detection rates would increase over time.

 

Yes it is a problem, a big problem in some areas. Hype from the media however, perpetuated by the social media outrage makes it look as though the situation is worsening, not the detection improving. Headlines sell papers (and other news media) and theres nowt like making news 'sexy' to attract readers.

 

I will end by saying I do not approve in any way, shape of form driving under the influence of drugs (or drink) over the prescribed limits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Fat Albert said:

I was being intentionally ridiculous; sorry you missed my sarcasm. 

If you want a literal view, read Mr Plodd’s post which pretty much sums up my opinion.  
I absolutely agree all road users have a duty of care and I take mine seriously, but a balanced and unemotional approach is needed. 

 No need to apologise Albert and yes I did miss your sarcasm  as I said too much of a Hot Potato for some due to personal experience. Maybe Mr Plodd's view is fine in your opinion but maybe not with others... 

 

GAS ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, kelper said:

The government has to make laws based on evidence.  A zero limit won't cut the accident rate and will further harm the hospitality trade.

 

But countries that have a no drink drive laws must have the evidence .

 

We have all seen tests showing alcohols effect the reactions . 

https://beta.northumbria.police.uk/advice-and-info/road-safety-and-vehicles/driving-under-the-influence-of-drugs-and-alcohol/

Edited by CommanderDave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

IMO the "drink drive problem drivers" is confined to those who drink too much, and I don't think any downward alteration in the numerical value for a conviction would make the  slightest difference to their drink drive habits and the consequences

 

It would make a big difference to what the now safe minimal consumption driver who takes a couple of units over a meal would do, but IMO these are not the problem drivers.

A consequence of that impact on the moderate drinking driver would be a further loss of our quintessential English pubs, something I would really miss and I believe our way of life spoilt by it.

 

As an offshoot, where I think as big a problem now lies is those driving on drugs, legal, grey area and prohibited. Edit; I see this has also been flagged up.

 

 

Edited by JTQ
  • +1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The biggest threat we face today is from those driving having taken illegal drugs.   While drink driving is on the decrease, drug taking is increasing with unpredictable behaviour by those "Druggies" driving a motor vehicle.  

Edited by bessacarr425

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have noticed the number of MH drivers that use Brit stops and stop in pub car parks that usually means they spend in the pub that will have a good drink then roll out into their motorhome at closing time and then set off early the next morning without a thought of drink driving the next morning .

 

 

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AJGalaxy2012 said:

There is as I'm sure you know a sweet spot where a critical amount of alcohol actually improves driving ability

I'd like to see the evidence for that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, CommanderDave said:

I have noticed the number of MH drivers that use Brit stops and stop in pub car parks that usually means they spend in the pub that will have a good drink then roll out into their motorhome at closing time and then set off early the next morning without a thought of drink driving the next morning .

 

 

Dave

 

Yip have mentioned this in discussions in the past. Reminded my Southern Brothers to be careful due to our new or different DD limit in Scotland. Can someone remind me what the actual law is regarding parked up in MH (Non Site). Thinking more of the Wild Camping aspect as one of our Troops has just bought a VW T5 Camper , absolute belter by the way and likes her wee glass at night ... 

 

GAS ... 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, JTQ said:

 

 

As an offshoot, where I think as big a problem now lies is those driving on drugs, legal, grey area and prohibited. Edit; I see this has also been flagged up.

 

 

 

As I said in a previous post my other concern that seems to go unnoticed is the Drivers that are on heavy medication who choose to drive against Doctors orders resulting in hitting pedestrians. Another recent incident on Boxing Day when a LandRover collided with a group of pedestrians resulting in one fatality. Not saying this was drink or drug related as the investigation is still on going but previous incidents have been.

 

I see that Scotland is about to introduce "Super Tags" or Sobriety Tags for repeat alcohol related offenders also including Drink Drivers. Apparently it test's your sweat every 30 minutes checking for alcohol in your system with Police having the facility to access the results remotely. They are also tamper proof and the UK Government are considering the same Tags for England and Wales .....

 

GAS ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Grumpy Auld Smeesh said:

 

As I said in a previous post my other concern that seems to go unnoticed is the Drivers that are on heavy medication who choose to drive against Doctors orders resulting in hitting pedestrians. Another recent incident on Boxing Day when a LandRover collided with a group of pedestrians resulting in one fatality. Not saying this was drink or drug related as the investigation is still on going but previous incidents have been.

 

I see that Scotland is about to introduce "Super Tags" or Sobriety Tags for repeat alcohol related offenders also including Drink Drivers. Apparently it test's your sweat every 30 minutes checking for alcohol in your system with Police having the facility to access the results remotely. They are also tamper proof and the UK Government are considering the same Tags for England and Wales .....

 

GAS ...

 

How does the tag know whether you're driving or just a passenger?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bessacarr425 said:

The biggest threat we face today is from those driving having taken illegal drugs.   While drink driving is on the decrease, drug taking is increasing with unpredictable behaviour by those "Druggies" driving a motor vehicle.  

The biggest threat is what could be described as "criminal stupidity"! People who drive in stupid ways, often assisted by excessive drugs and/or alcohol. Frequently being stupid enough to get behind the wheel in the first place when any sensible person could see that were in no fit state to do so. Sadly, far too often, they are also stupid enough to get behind the wheel without licence or insurance, and not always with the car owner's consent. 

It seems that there is no law that will successfully prevent them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...