Drink driving limits

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-30329743

Scotland have reduced their drink driving limits by nearly a half (from 80 down to 50mg per 100ml blood). Northern Ireland considering the same, but England not planning to.

What is the legal limit elsewhere in Europe?(All figures per 100ml of blood)

 

• Zero - Romania, Slovakia, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovenia (drivers with less than three years experience), Germany (less than two years experience or aged under 21)
  
• 20mg - Estonia, Poland, Sweden, Cyprus (south), Ireland (learner drivers only), Latvia (less than two years experience), Lithuania (less than two years experience), Greece (less than two years experience), Luxembourg (less than two years experience and professional drivers), France (bus drivers only)
  
• 24mg - Slovenia
  
• 30mg - Germany (for those involved in an accident)
  
• 40mg - Lithuania
  
• 50mg - Scotland, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany (if not involved in an accident), Gibraltar, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Cyprus (north)
  
• 80mg - England, Wales, Northern Ireland, Malta
  

That will leave England and Wales pretty much out on their own with a considerably higher limit than other European countries. So what do people think? Here in Norway it's 20mg, which is low enough that it is effectively zero. You cannot knowingly have any kind of alcoholic drink and then drive, but it gives a small chance of passing if you drank the night before and are driving early, although it's not advisable.

Should it be effectively zero? Is this over-protective and unnecessary? Should England and Scotland have the same to avoid border crossing problems or do you deserve what you get if you have a drink before driving into a country with different laws?

Interesting to see that Germany has a sliding scale limit, is that sensible or too likely to cause confusion?

When are they going to have laws about driving when suffering with a cold. Far more dangerous than the current drink drive limit.

I don't know what the stats are for accidents caused by those around the drink drive limit.

I can drive better after 5 pints than about 90% of the population when they are sober.

There should be IQ tests for driving also.

So what do people think?

I'd need to see the statistics that show how many accidents are solely caused as a result of driving with 80mg before being able to come to a conclusion.

There should be IQ tests for driving

This

I'd need to see the statistics that show how many accidents are solely caused as a result of driving with 80mg before being able to come to a conclusion.

Exactly my thoughts.

I believe that other countries with a range of lower limits also have a sliding scale of punishments.

I started driving in the 1970s when drink driving was fairly common – how else did rural pubs that didn’t sell food manage to survive? It makes me shudder to reflect on how reckless I was as a young driver who liked a drink or several – heaven only knows how I didn’t end up killing myself or, even worse, someone else.

Nowadays, I won’t drive if I’ve had even a single drop of alcohol because I know that if I was involved in an accident I would never be able to live with the thought that I might have avoided it if I’d been stone cold sober. So, yeah, if it were up to me I’d probably set the limit at zero, or pretty near to it so as to avoid the fermenting fruit or alcoholic mouthwash or whatever issue.

Having said all this, I do agree that some people on or around the limit may well be better drivers than some of the completely sober idiots on the road, but that’s a separate issue, imo.

I have a pint (2 max) and then drive without any concerns - but that is only because of the current levels.

I personally think that it should be zero.... and I know that goes against what I said above about drinking and driving... BUT if the level was zero, I wouldn't do it.

Hypocrite, I know.

I started driving in the 1970s when drink driving was fairly common – how else did rural pubs that didn’t sell food manage to survive? It makes me shudder to reflect on how reckless I was as a young driver who liked a drink or several – heaven only knows how I didn’t end up killing myself or, even worse, someone else.

 

Nowadays, I won’t drive if I’ve had even a single drop of alcohol because I know that if I was involved in an accident I would never be able to live with the thought that I might have avoided it if I’d been stone cold sober. So, yeah, if it were up to me I’d probably set the limit at zero, or pretty near to it so as to avoid the fermenting fruit or alcoholic mouthwash or whatever issue.

 

Having said all this, I do agree that some people on or around the limit may well be better drivers than some of the completely sober idiots on the road, but that’s a separate issue, imo.

I'm now like you.

There is the problem of still having alcohol in your system next morning.

 

There is the problem of still having alcohol in your system next morning.

Good point. I believe this can be an issue up to 12 hours after drinking.

I can drive better after 5 pints than about 90% of the population when they are sober.

 

There should be IQ tests for driving also.

True and agreed!

Plus add to that anyone in a Range Rover seems incapable of driving properly.

A huge number of accidents are caused by people dropping cigarettes into their lap.

I'd also like to see stats on how many accidents happen while the stereo is up really loud.

I'd also like to see stats on how many accidents happen while the stereo is up really loud.

Or whilst a child is acting up in the back of the car...

People on mobiles (non hands free) whilst driving. It makes you a cuunt.

I struggle to understand the mindset of people who attempt to text whilst driving. Utter mongs.

People on mobiles (non hands free) whilst driving. It makes you a cuunt.

 

I struggle to understand the mindset of people who attempt to text whilst driving. Utter mongs.

It's the dickheads you see driving, whilst holding a mobile to their ear, in a car which is clearly fitted with bluetooth or some other system that doesn't mean they need to hold a phone. Morons.

It's the dickheads you see driving, whilst holding a mobile to their ear, in a car which is clearly fitted with bluetooth or some other system that doesn't mean they need to hold a phone. Morons.

Have to say the car I bought in the Summer is the first with bluetooth - and it's brilliant.

True and agreed!

 

Plus add to that anyone in a Range Rover seems incapable of driving properly.

Or anyone wearing a hat in the car.

Using a phone whilst driving a car fitted with Bluetooth should incur a punishment tens times higher than one without. Everyday I see 'mums' in Chelsea tractors taking their little darlings to school while making essential calls to: their personal trainer, beautician etc. The other group that have not yet heard of hands free are van drivers, but then many of them are ignorant of all driving regulations.

I don't think we need to change the limits, just have harsher punishments for people who break them. They are the problem, people with a blazé attitude and just don't seem that bothered.

I think the punishment for drink driving should be no different to that for attempted murder. The punishment for actually killing someone should be no different to murder. At the moment the maximum sentence for drink driving is 6 months, which is hardly ever handed out due to overcrowded prisons. Can you imagine someone being given a £5,000 fine for attempted murder?

These are the current penalties

https://www.gov.uk/drink-driving-penalties

I can drive better after 5 pints than about 90% of the population when they are sober.

 

There should be IQ tests for driving also.

Yeah me too! The rest of the population are morons!!

People on mobiles (non hands free) whilst driving. It makes you a cuunt.

 

I struggle to understand the mindset of people who attempt to text whilst driving. Utter mongs.

Even more scary are the lorry drivers who use their mobiles manually. There's a particular blackspot where the M40 meets the road to Milton Keynes (Cherwell Services?). The roundabout has a poor camber but still the stupid idiots hack up the M40 sliproad onto the roundabout using their phones leaving one hand to negotiate the roundabout.

I believe that other countries with a range of lower limits also have a sliding scale of punishments.

France fine you from .05 to .08 - ban there after. The germans give you a 3-6 month ban for .05 to .08. Would be happy to see the reduction in the limit but to get a 1 - 2 year ban for finishing a pint seems a little excessive.

People on mobiles (non hands free) whilst driving. It makes you a cuunt.

 

I struggle to understand the mindset of people who attempt to text whilst driving. Utter mongs.

This is what I have an issue with - what text can you receive that is so important that it cannot wait for you to pull over or finish your journey. That celeb lawyer who gets people off on loopholes hit the nail on the head - ban people for a year if caught - they would stop overnight.

I lifted this from the Times website

It found that a driver’s reaction times slowed by 46% when he or she was making a call on a hand-held mobile, by 37% when texting while driving and by 27% during hands-free calls.

For those on the drink-drive limit of 80mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood, reaction times were reduced by 13%

I don't think we need to change the limits, just have harsher punishments for people who break them. They are the problem, people with a blazé attitude and just don't seem that bothered.

 

I think the punishment for drink driving should be no different to that for attempted murder. The punishment for actually killing someone should be no different to murder. At the moment the maximum sentence for drink driving is 6 months, which is hardly ever handed out due to overcrowded prisons. Can you imagine someone being given a £5,000 fine for attempted murder?

 

These are the current penalties

 

 

https://www.gov.uk/drink-driving-penalties

You do realise the main difference between murder and manslaughter is intent, and why the sentence is longer. If you intend to kill someone the chance is you may do it again - hence the (much) longer sentence.

Equating it to manslaughter is far more reasonable.

You do realise the main difference between murder and manslaughter is intent, and why the sentence is longer. If you intend to kill someone the chance is you may do it again - hence the (much) longer sentence.

 

Equating it to manslaughter is far more reasonable.

Perhaps but I don't think there should be much distinction, if any, between intent and just not giving a sh*t if you do kill someone. If you drink drive you are basically saying you don't care if you kill someone. To me that is as bad as saying you want to kill someone.

To me, someone who doesn't care if they run over and kill a couple of children is no better than someone who deliberately goes out to try and kill.

I lifted this from the Times website

It found that a driver’s reaction times slowed by 46% when he or she was making a call on a hand-held mobile, by 37% when texting while driving and by 27% during hands-free calls.

For those on the drink-drive limit of 80mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood, reaction times were reduced by 13%

So, you're twice as likely to cause an accident during a hands-free phone call as you are if you have the maximum legal amount of alcohol in your system.

Would be interesting to see similar comparative stats for all other forms of distraction and/or lack of underlying intelligence.

Perhaps but I don't think there should be much distinction, if any, between intent and just not giving a sh*t if you do kill someone. If you drink drive you are basically saying you don't care if you kill someone. To me that is as bad as saying you want to kill someone.

 

To me, someone who doesn't care if they run over and kill a couple of children is no better than someone who deliberately goes out to try and kill.

But you're not saying that at all? You're saying you fancy having a drink when you go out, and fancy driving (not condoning this by the way - I find it abhorrent). It's like saying if you drive 71mph on the motorway you don't give a **** if you kill someone, so surely anyone that speeds and kills someone should also be done for murder. So in essence, get the same sentence as someone like Ian Huntley. That's not reasonable and I can't agree with you.

But you're not saying that at all? You're saying you fancy having a drink when you go out, and fancy driving (not condoning this by the way - I find it abhorrent). It's like saying if you drive 71mph on the motorway you don't give a **** if you kill someone, so surely anyone that speeds and kills someone should also be done for murder. So in essence, get the same sentence as someone like Ian Huntley. That's not reasonable and I can't agree with you.

Nobody has ever been killed because a vehicle was doing 71mph. 70mph isn't the edge of danger it's just some arbitrary line in the sand which someone decided was the safe speed for a motorway. 60mph would be safer, so why not have that as the limit?

Reckless driving in general is what I'm again. I would feel much safer in a car with a sober driver doing 100 on a motorway than I would with a driver who had 4 pints.

Nobody has ever been killed because a vehicle was doing 71mph. 70mph isn't the edge of danger it's just some arbitrary line in the sand which someone decided was the safe speed for a motorway. 60mph would be safer, so why not have that as the limit?

 

Reckless driving in general is what I'm again. I would feel much safer in a car with a sober driver doing 100 on a motorway than I would with a driver who had 4 pints.

Well of course you would. But I'd feel safer in a car with someone who has 100mg of alcohol in their blood doing the speed limit than in a car with someone doing 100mph.

The biggest cause of accidents in the UK is from speeding, around 30% more than from drink driving. Hence, I would say that you have to apply the same to those who break the speed limit.

Speed limits are just guidelines! I make sensible, informed decisions based on road conditions etc. Sometimes I go faster than speed guidelines, sometimes I go more slow than suggested.

Coppers tbf are quite ok with this, they don't pull you over if you're driving safe, even if you're speeding. Cameras however, are another matter. There is no arguing with those bros! You just have to pay them off, like bribe or tax.

Speed limits are just guidelines! I make sensible, informed decisions based on road conditions etc. Sometimes I go faster than speed guidelines, sometimes I go more slow than suggested.

 

Coppers tbf are quite ok with this, they don't pull you over if you're driving safe, even if you're speeding. Cameras however, are another matter. There is no arguing with those bros! You just have to pay them off, like bribe or tax.

To be fair though, you could say the drink drive limit is also a guideline...

A friend of mine failed the road side breathalyser due to just having a puff on his inhaler.

I think women should be banned from driving. Its bad enough that they are allowed to play football.

(Lord Duckhunter forced me to post this.)

How the people who let their dogs jump around their car, and I have seen them on the drivers lap when moving. ,

A friend of mine failed the road side breathalyser due to just having a puff on his inhaler.

I think women should be banned from driving. Its bad enough that they are allowed to play football.

 

(Lord Duckhunter forced me to post this.)

That's a bit harsh ! They should be allowed to drive provided they have proof that they're dropping off or picking up their old man from the pub, or doing the weekly shop.

Talking of pubs and being over the limit in the morning, I play 5 a side with a copper. He told me they now moniter cars left in pub car parks overnight. By leaving your car you are advertising the fact that you're on the lash. When you pick your car up in the morning they breathalise you. He said they're nicking as many drink drivers in the morning as they are at night. He advised us to never leave you car in pub carpark overnight ,unless you're 100% sure you'll pass the test next morning. Leave your car on a nearby street.

For the amount of difference 50 or 80mg makes to your evening why wouldn't you make the limit zero?

That's a bit harsh ! They should be allowed to drive provided they have proof that they're dropping off or picking up their old man from the pub, or doing the weekly shop.

 

Talking of pubs and being over the limit in the morning, I play 5 a side with a copper. He told me they now moniter cars left in pub car parks overnight. By leaving your car you are advertising the fact that you're on the lash. When you pick your car up in the morning they breathalise you. He said they're nicking as many drink drivers in the morning as they are at night. He advised us to never leave you car in pub carpark overnight ,unless you're 100% sure you'll pass the test next morning. Leave your car on a nearby street.

Or just don't drink alcohol and drive then you are fine.

Or just don't drink alcohol and drive then you are fine.

I agree with Hypo, use a crackpipe.

Well of course you would. But I'd feel safer in a car with someone who has 100mg of alcohol in their blood doing the speed limit than in a car with someone doing 100mph.

 

The biggest cause of accidents in the UK is from speeding, around 30% more than from drink driving. Hence, I would say that you have to apply the same to those who break the speed limit.

I would say the number of people killed by actual speed is far lower than the statistics would suggest. It's more often a case of going too fast AND being to close to the car in front, going to fast AND another car pulls out without looking in his mirrors, going too fast on icy roads or going too fast in bad weather.

Sure the is a reckless amount of speed, like doing 50mph driving past a school but you have to be a significant margin above the speed limit to be dangerous IMO.

I would say the number of people killed by actual speed is far lower than the statistics would suggest. It's more often a case of going too fast AND being to close to the car in front, going to fast AND another car pulls out without looking in his mirrors, going too fast on icy roads or going too fast in bad weather.

 

Sure the is a reckless amount of speed, like doing 50mph driving past a school but you have to be a significant margin above the speed limit to be dangerous IMO.

Well I think we can tell you do one and not the other, which is probably why you are trying to make light of it.

Either way, to say that people should be charged with murder when they are even 1mg over the alcohol limit is a frankly ridiculous idea, and the fact that you'd have to change the whole criminal injury section of law to reflect the removal of manslaughter and negligence.

For the amount of difference 50 or 80mg makes to your evening why wouldn't you make the limit zero?

There are medical conditions that can cause a small amount of alcohol to be in the blood and there's always the morning-after problem. There are practical reasons for allowing a small amount.

Drugs, however, are a different matter.

Well I think we can tell you do one and not the other, which is probably why you are trying to make light of it.

 

Either way, to say that people should be charged with murder when they are even 1mg over the alcohol limit is a frankly ridiculous idea, and the fact that you'd have to change the whole criminal injury section of law to reflect the removal of manslaughter and negligence.

Actually no, I pretty much follow the speed limits and I've never been pulled over for speeding. I just don't see people doing 80 on a motorway as a problem. I do have a problem with people who chose to drive whilst drunk and are apparently not bothered if they kill me or anyone in my family.

Actually no, I pretty much follow the speed limits and I've never been pulled over for speeding. I just don't see people doing 80 on a motorway as a problem. I do have a problem with people who chose to drive whilst drunk and are apparently not bothered if they kill me or anyone in my family.

Drunk, or had a drink? Don't forget you are over the limit having one pint. Important distinction here.

Good point regarding using your phone whilst driving

I have (and always got one for many years gone by) a parrot blue tooth phone thingy. Excellent bits of kit

If my next car does not have anything hands free wise built in already, will get another

Even if you are strapped for cash, the cheapo blue tooth devices you get that clip on to your visor are pretty good

Drunk, or had a drink? Don't forget you are over the limit having one pint. Important distinction here.

Having enough alcohol in your system to cause any kind of judgement. I've driven after one pint plenty of times because I know it has no effect on my judgement. I'm not saying the limit needs to be changed, I'm saying people who break the limit should face tougher sentences. I believe the Police allow a small margin of error below which they don't prosecute, I don't have a problem with that.

The fact is that most people could probably drink two pints and be around the maximum limit. I don't see why anyone would ever need to drink more than this and then get behind the wheel. Anyone doing so should face severe penalties IMO and they would only have themselves to blame.

Having enough alcohol in your system to cause any kind of judgement. I've driven after one pint plenty of times because I know it has no effect on my judgement. I'm not saying the limit needs to be changed, I'm saying people who break the limit should face tougher sentences. I believe the Police allow a small margin of error below which they don't prosecute, I don't have a problem with that.

 

The fact is that most people could probably drink two pints and be around the maximum limit. I don't see why anyone would ever need to drink more than this and then get behind the wheel. Anyone doing so should face severe penalties IMO and they would only have themselves to blame.

2 pints is 2.5 times the legal limit? 1 pint is usually over the limit.

I'm sorry, I'm not understanding your argument. You say people should be allowed to drink 2 pints and drive even though thats more than twice over the limit, yet people who break the legal limit and kill someone should get done for murder?

Personally I think there should be an enforced driving test every 5 years or so for people. Would make sure that people are sticking to the practices they should do.

And if the driver is elderly, a yearly test with a Doctors note saying that they are competent to drive.

Bad drivers are worse than over the limit IMHO.

I don't think we need to change the limits, just have harsher punishments for people who break them. They are the problem, people with a blazé attitude and just don't seem that bothered.

 

I think the punishment for drink driving should be no different to that for attempted murder. The punishment for actually killing someone should be no different to murder. At the moment the maximum sentence for drink driving is 6 months, which is hardly ever handed out due to overcrowded prisons. Can you imagine someone being given a £5,000 fine for attempted murder?

 

These are the current penalties

 

 

https://www.gov.uk/drink-driving-penalties

bonkers