Your Thoughts On The Proposed New Drink Driving Limits

Anyone got any thoughts on this ?

The proposal is to cut the limits from80mg/100ml to 50mg/100ml, about one small glass of wine or just less than a pint of standard beer.

This would obviously affect people living in rural areas.

Personally would go for zero, i.e. if you drink at all you don't drive.

This is unusual for me, I normally reject any ideas put forward by our present Government !

I'm for the zero tolerance option. I've had two friends killed by drink drivers, so maybe I'm biased.

I don't see how halving the current limit will do any more to catch the people that have no regard for the law and go out and drink '10 pints' and then drive home every weekend.

I've no problem with a lower limit.

Reducing it to the point where you couldn't
have a drink and then drive.

Not zero though, to protect from positive
tests after taking cough medicine etc.

Remember that is a 1 tot, beer, glass of wine per hour and not so bad for a casual drinker.

Being in the restaurant business it has affected business badly when it went down to 50mg in SA. Wine sales went down, but light beer sales has gone up

Drinkers will drink and take a chance, no matter how low you take it

Go for "zero tolerance"

No excuse for drinking and driving

Originally Posted by Roswell

I don't see how halving the current limit will do any more to catch the people that have no regard for the law and go out and drink '10 pints' and then drive home every weekend.

This is very true, it will not stop the hardened drink driver, Food for thought re the taking of medicines with an alcohol base too. Maybe there is more to this than a casual don't drink at all sort of ban.......

Why tempt fate: you drink, you leave the keys at home..... simple

It's immaterial what the alcohol tolerance is, those who drink and drive, will drink and drive irrespective of whatever legislation states.

Originally Posted by Roswell

I don't see how halving the current limit will do any more to catch the people that have no regard for the law and go out and drink '10 pints' and then drive home every weekend.

I agree with this.

Need to keep in perpective that drink driving is only one cause, tiredness, distraction from telephone calls, kids messing about in the back, stress, etc all cause accidents. Actually what are the stats for accidents and causes, does anyone know? Would be interesting.

It needs to be proven that a small glass of wine or normal pint DOES cause accidents and then fair enough, go for zero tolerance. It's quite possible after a stressful day that one of those could be relaxing and actually be beneficial in the journey home from work say? Don't know and not suggesting everyone do this () but we need research/evidence before applying law.

To be succint, if it's known to have a detremental effect in say even 30% of test cases - then why does such a limit even exist?

I prefer not to bother myself though and that's not to do with the fact I think I can't handle the car well enough, it just a preference thing. I do wonder though if you had a few drinks the night before, no "heavy bender", what a trace amount of alcohol would mean the next day if breathalysed, if zero tolerance came in?

We have zero tolerance on all new drivers for the first 4 years, no matter what their age, as long as they have a L or N in the back window. No one complains about that.
The rest of us have the .8, I should think that making the zero tolerance across the board would not cause any hardship to the *normal* person.
This, as has been said already, won't stop the tragic loss of life by the alcoholics of the world.

I'd have to say then, leave it like it is. Responsible people will do the right thing and not drive when drunk, we have been conditioned to accept this over the years.

Originally Posted by classicgal93

This, as has been said already, won't stop the tragic loss of life by the alcoholics of the world.

I agree with what you say CG, but I feel to term all those who are moronic enough to drive whilst under the influence of alcohol 'alcoholics' is harsh.

I used the term alcoholics to mean anyone stupid enough to drink and drive. They are not in their right minds and even by over drinking once a week, you can be labelled an alcoholic.

I misunderstood you CG, I do apologise

I think they should stay as they are. I don't know if there are statistics that prove, but I can't imagine it makes much difference to the average driver whether you've had 1.5 or 0.9 pints of beer. And zero tolerance is just not feasible to police.

There's a lot of driver's who are more dangerous when sober than some people are when drunk. I think the law needs to take that into account, and also needs to take into account how drunk someone is when they drove, not just whether they were over the limit or not.

Someone who has drove home after a gallon should be punished more severly than someone who has drove home after 3 pints.

Death's caused by drink drivers are on the up because traffic enforcement is by speed camera only. You need traffic cops to enforce the current standard before there is any point in reducing the limit at which you prosecute someone.
The government are considering this as it would not require an act of parliament so is a cheap and easy headline grabber.