Alcohol limit slashed from 80 to 20mgs?

ninty9er

gurramok wrote:

ie..they were not drunk enough to affect judgement in accidents..

Am I the only one who sees something wrong with this drivel

Biro

Commander Vimes wrote:

it would but the gardai don't carry around blood testing laboratories in their cars. the portable breath testers give them cause to arrest someone but if they just suspect someone is on drugs and a blood test back at the station says they're not they can be done for wrongful arrest

There are medical devices now for diabetics where it does a tiny pinprick on the finger and manages to measure the blood-sugar levels with bearly a drop of blood. Surely they could come up with some similar device for drugs? I've no medical knowlege what-so-ever, so I don't know how much blood you need to get a reading.

ninty9er

Biro wrote:

There are medical devices now for diabetics where it does a tiny pinprick on the finger and manages to measure the blood-sugar levels with bearly a drop of blood. Surely they could come up with some similar device for drugs? I've no medical knowlege what-so-ever, so I don't know how much blood you need to get a reading.

That's exactly what I was trying to get at, you hit the nail on the head Biro;)

um7y1h83ge06nx

I'm totally against drink driving but having the limit at 20mg is a little OTT.

There is little room for error in that figure. I'm cautious about driving the next day but with this small figure, it's hard to know when you may be fit to drive the day after a night out.

If this law is introduced, the government should make subsidised, but reliable home breathalysers available to the general public.

This would help people like myself stay on the right side of the law.

Biro

Charli Low Cursor wrote:

I'm totally against drink driving but having the limit at 20mg is a little OTT.

There is little room for error in that figure. I'm cautious about driving the next day but with this small figure, it's hard to know when you may be fit to drive the day after a night out.

If this law is introduced, the government should make subsidised, but reliable home breathalysers available to the general public.

This would help people like myself stay on the right side of the law.

I'd tend to agree with this post. How low is 20mg anyway? I mean if you used an alcohol based medicine for a mouth ulcer would that read in a breath test?
I rarely go out anymore, but was out recently and had 4 or 5 pints over about 3.5 hours, last one at maybe 1:30am. Left the car at home the following morning knowing that I shouldn't drive, thats sound. Had a big breakfast. Then later, had a full dinner at about half 1 in the day. Then collected the car on the way back to work. But really, I have no idea if that was leaving it long enough. My instinct says that I would be well clear at that stage, but does it mean that I'm a menace to society and a blaguard and a killer because I collected my car at lunch time?
Personally, I don't think I did anything irresponsible, but I'm waiting for someone now to tell me I did. Maybe they're right.

endplate

Victor wrote:

If the road is bad, adjust your behavior to suit.

http://www.rsa.ie/NEWS/News/Link_Between_Alcohol_and_Road_Deaths.html

That's a very dismissive statement, something like Martin Cullen would say

People make mistakes no matter how sober they are. What about people who are unfamilar with a section of road and get caught out in a so called accident black spot it's not necessarly that persons fault the government were only able to put a sign up (yes signs can be missed) rather than fix the problem

BTW thanks for the link

ArphaRima

I've no medical knowlege what-so-ever, so I don't know how much blood you need to get a reading.

Neither do the Gardai. I would not allow a Garda to take a blood sample from me using any device. They could demand one, but I would refuse all except from a qualified nurse or doctor in a sanitised environment.
The side of the road on a pissy saturday night, from a grubby country garda is not the same thing.

Hotblack Desiato

Victor wrote:

Did you bother to look at my link? 7% of drivers killed have BALs of 20-80.

Seems to me they're assuming that alcohol is a contributory factor to the accident in ALL accidents where there is a detectable alcohol level. That makes a mockery of any attempt to gather meaningful statistics. You might as well say that 10% of drivers in crashes have red hair therefore red hair is a contributory factor in 10% of road accidents.

Now if you did a study and showed that redhead drivers are involved in 10% of accidents but only make up 5% of the population, you could infer that they're worse drivers than average (sorry redheads, don't take this personally!)

Short of stopping lots of drivers, not involved in accidents, at random and recording their BAC to provide a control, the statement that 7% of drivers in crashes had a certain BAC level proves nothing.

Guy:Incognito

endplate wrote:

People make mistakes no matter how sober they are.

Exactly, and the point is not to mulpiply your chances of haveing/causing a crash by drinking. Theres plenty of crashes that dont involve drink so adding to it by drinking is stupid.

endplate

Stekelly wrote:

Exactly, and the point is not to mulpiply your chances of haveing/causing a crash by drinking. Theres plenty of crashes that dont involve drink so adding to it by drinking is stupid.

I'm not condoning any amount of alcohol in the bloodstream in any way. I do know that it has a bearing on driver preformance. My point is lowering the the drink driving limit is not going to make a difference if you normally drive after a few pints you will be over the limit no matter what it is.

That's why I think it's a diversion tactic and a bit of electioneering by our present Government. How come you never see speed traps on the back roads where the deaths are occuring. The reason is the Government is putting pressure on our Garda force to catch speeders and the easiest way is to sit on safer 2 or 3 lane carraigeways and catch people 5km/h over the limit

Lafortezza

How do you go about estimating if you would be over the limit the morning after a night in the pub?
Say 5 pints + food, bed by midnight, up at 8am and drive to work with no breakfast. 6ft 15st male.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

overdriver

I have to say, the notion of professional drivers having a really low limit - basically one which only allows for a slight residue from the night before, seems to me to be a good thing, vote whoring ( which is no doubt the case) or not.

ninty9er

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

It seems you took me up wrong, I was talking about a pointing finger pin prick, not full scale blood donation....and only in relation to suspected drug driving, brethalyser for drink driving still

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

or just use the ones most pubs provide.

Doesn't affect me for Christmas, since the tonsilitis fairy has sentenced me to 10 days on fanta while I run my course of (non-drowsy) anti-biotics.

biko

lafortezza wrote:

How do you go about estimating if you would be over the limit the morning after a night in the pub?
Say 5 pints + food, bed by midnight, up at 8am and drive to work with no breakfast. 6ft 15st male.

http://www.saferdrive.ie/?gclid=CLDd6LrxoIkCFUB-MAod6USaOw
http://saferdrive.ie/further_information/the_morning_after.html

MrPudding

overdriver wrote:

I have to say, the notion of professional drivers having a really low limit - basically one which only allows for a slight residue from the night before, seems to me to be a good thing, vote whoring ( which is no doubt the case) or not.

How many professional drivers have been involved in incidents and subsequently been found to have blood alcohol levels lower than 80mg?

MrP

cormac_byrne

lafortezza wrote:

How do you go about estimating if you would be over the limit the morning after a night in the pub?
Say 5 pints + food, bed by midnight, up at 8am and drive to work with no breakfast. 6ft 15st male.

http://www.brake.org.uk/index.php?p=946

2 hours per pint + 1 hour => alcohol free @ 11am

biko

cormac_byrne wrote:

http://www.brake.org.uk/index.php?p=946
2 hours per pint + 1 hour => alcohol free @ 11am

Drink 4 pints of Stella and you can’t drive for at least 13 hours from finishing your last pint. If you finish at midnight, you aren’t safe until after 1pm the next day.

I know a fair few ppl that would get up at 8 and drive to work after 4-5 pints the night before.

ArphaRima

I didnt look at the links, but Im pretty sure its along the lines of the following based on what I've learnt.
One pint of beer is 2 units. We process alcohol at 1 unit an hour. Eating slows our absorption of the alcohol. Both before and after. Sleeping also slows your absorption/processing. Worst case scenario is if you eat heavily, drink heavily, and then sleep heavily before being measured. Exactly when most people would reckon you'd be safest.
Ironically its best if you've eaten nothing and dont sleep. It might make you road legal, but I doubt it would make you safer.

cormac_byrne

http://www.brake.org.uk/index.php?p=946
2 hours per pint + 1 hour => alcohol free @ 11am

The calculations seem to say you would be alcohol free by 11am.
If that's true you could drive a bit before that as you don't need to be at zero alcohol but anything below the 80mg limit.

Also it doesn't seem to take into account the amount of alcohol absorbed while drinking. i.e some or all of your first pint already absorbed by the time you finish your drinking session.

So you could be ok at 8am (but cutting it very fine)

Seth Brundle

endplate wrote:

My point is lowering the the drink driving limit is not going to make a difference if you normally drive after a few pints you will be over the limit no matter what it is.

Agreed. Those who completely disregard the law in this manner will more than likely. However, it will deter many from driving whilst under the influence.

lafortezza wrote:

How do you go about estimating if you would be over the limit the morning after a night in the pub?

If you are not sure then either don't drink or don't drive!

overdriver wrote:

I have to say, the notion of professional drivers having a really low limit - basically one which only allows for a slight residue from the night before, seems to me to be a good thing, vote whoring ( which is no doubt the case) or not.

It is already in place with some types of driver...
http://forum.platform11.org/showthread.php?t=1506

Jumpy

pburns wrote:

That kind of black/white thinking drives me nuts!

How can someone genuinely drunk behind the wheel of a car coming home from the pub be 'the same' as someone 12 hrs later after perhaps a sleep, meal & shower who only TECHNICALLY has residues of alcohol still in the blood (particularly if we are talking about this ridiculous 20mg proposal)?

FFS.

*shakes head at ignorance*

It isnt residues it IS alcohol.
If it is in your blood at a high level then it will have the same effects as it would the night before. Your reactions are impaired to the same level.
If you are caught over the limit in the morning, then YOU ARE STILL OVER THE LIMIT, and YOU ARE STILL DRINK DRIVING.

Get it into your head.

Jumpy

We get taught that back in school FFS, maybe if they dropped the requirement for learning an unused language and teaching about religion they might be able to fit a few more things into the education in this country.

Biro

Jumpy wrote:

We get taught that back in school FFS, maybe if they dropped the requirement for learning an unused language and teaching about religion they might be able to fit a few more things into the education in this country.

Yes. Because the cause of all road deaths are down to Irish and Religion. Thats the sort of thinking that we DON'T need running the country.

Jumpy

Biro wrote:

Yes. Because the cause of all road deaths are down to Irish and Religion. Thats the sort of thinking that we DON'T need running the country.

Yes thats exactly what I said. Thank you for actually reading my post.
Of course adding a sentence that I didnt write here and there shouldnt be a problem now should it?

Biro

What are you smoking? Get back to me when you start to make sense.

ninty9er

Biro wrote:

What are you smoking? Get back to me when you start to make sense.

Agreed

overdriver

Touches on a good point though. In the US, kids are educated about the road, driving, and cars far younger than we are. They also, in general seem to learn to drive much younger.

pburns

Jumpy wrote:

FFS.

*shakes head at ignorance*

It isnt residues it IS alcohol.
If it is in your blood at a high level then it will have the same effects as it would the night before. Your reactions are impaired to the same level.
If you are caught over the limit in the morning, then YOU ARE STILL OVER THE LIMIT, and YOU ARE STILL DRINK DRIVING.

Get it into your head.

Calm down...I wasn't proposing alcohol would be in the blood "at a high level"...

The example I gave was of a person coming home from the pub (at the latest 12.30 @ w/ends) and driving almost 12 hrs later.

Now (assuming it wasn't a mad binge) is anyone going to tell me this is unsafe? I mean in the REAL world? Under a 20mg limit it may just be illegal...

Now someones gonna come back and say ANY alcohol in the blood will impair driver ability. So will fatigue or lack of concentration or countless other factors: aggressive attitude, inadequete driver training, bad roads, excessive speed... Most of these however - apart from speed - cannot be measured or are too difficult or costly to tackle. It could be argued that the powers-that-be jump disproportionately on alcohol (& speed also) for this reason. The politicions & Gardai have to be seen to be doing something, so they rachet up the legislation until it is the sensible, hitherto law-abiding motorist that suddenly finds themselves in trouble.

The current 80mg limit would seem sufficent IF ENFORCED TO THE MAXIMUM.

jimmycrackcorm

Doesn't matter if it goes down to 20. They'll still catch the same number of people.