Drink Driving...DO YOU DO IT ? ? ?

stepbar

stepbar wrote: »

Tonight I've had 4 cans of nice cool Carlsberg. Could I drive? I'd say I could. Would I do it? No, not in a month of Sunday's. The point is that trying to compare drink tolerances amongst different types of people is beyond retarded. I just wish I had a breathalizer testing machine on me at the moment and was able to read the results to the forum. I'd say I wouldn't be far beyond the limit TBH.

I'd like to see the results of the breathalizer and a US style sobiaety test just to see if it, or the absolute fixed limit would consider you fit to drive.

rafared

No. Never have never will. The limit shold be Zero IMO.

stepbar

rafared wrote: »

No. Never have never will. The limit shold be Zero IMO.

Why? because you have no drink tolerance? Please :rolleyes:

Wibbs

Yep did it once or twice in my youth decades ago. As did most of my mates too. Now I wouldnt TBH. The times I did were mostly fine. Dead of night stuff. Not too squiffy. Didnt meet any other cars. Daft? Yes damn right. Equally daft is the person who drives while massively fatigued, or otherwise derelict, (drugs, prescription or illegal). Though the fear on pot etc would ensure you never reached any more speed than a run down milk float. I've read. Apparently.

I think it's one of those safety memes that's current, that many sheep like to get behind to be right on, Mkay, like not wearing a seatbelt(did that too), not smoking(Oops), not binge drinking(ehhh ohh ehhh) or not wearing a rubber jonathon every single time and getting regular STD tests, between each partner(meh mostly). Many pay lip service, yet......but I would have to say of all those drink driving is one that I would wholeheartedly agree with.

jd007

Well i don't have a car so I guess the simple answer is no.

This thread does highlight one of the failings of the curent system (pass/fail) nothing in between!

Should there be a situation where the penalties are graded on exactly how drunk the driver actually is.

I won't define breathalyser readings, but general terms:

Slightly tipsy - (A traffic cop wouldn't stop this driver, but is stopped at a checkpoint) - three month ban
tipsy- (A traffic cop wouldn't stop this driver - but was seen leaving a pub & acting gullty!) - six month ban

slightly drunk (A traffic cop would stop this driver as he is acting odd) - one year

all the way up to pissed ten years ban and retake of the driving test.

rafared

rafared wrote: »

No. Never have never will. The limit shold be Zero IMO.

Zero is impossible, some people can produce achohol in their own bodies from eating certain foods.

Wibbs

I've cycled absolutely palatic and otherwise in a mentally altered state. Does that count? If it was a crime to drink walk I would have singlehandedly been responsible for reintroducing the death penalty.

The Big Red Button

rafared wrote: »

No. Never have never will. The limit shold be Zero IMO.

Now, as I've said so far in this thread, I have imposed a pretty-much-zero limit on myself .... but the idea of instating one across the board? That's just unfair and unattainable. For various reasons.

stepbar

Wibbs wrote: »

I've cycled absolutely palatic and otherwise in a mentally altered state. Does that count? If it was a crime to drink walk I would have singlehandedly been responsible for reintroducing the death penalty.

And so have I back in the day when cycling from the IFSC after 6 pints of Bulmers was in fashion (not to say it ever was but...). Was I more alert? Damm sure I was. Probably more alert then sober. Do you know my one and only cycling accident was a mistake on my own part. I was cycling down Dawson St and managed to fall off my bike completly sober (and I didn't even hit a car either). Stupidity on my own part.

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

I think it's one of those safety memes that's current, that many sheep like to get behind to be right on, Mkay, like not wearing a seatbelt(did that too), not smoking(Oops), not binge drinking(ehhh ohh ehhh) or not wearing a rubber jonathon every single time and getting regular STD tests, between each partner(meh mostly). Many pay lip service, yet......but I would have to say of all those drink driving is one that I would wholeheartedly agree with.

Sheep, most of are sheep in one way or another, why do you think the priest calls the congregation his flock!

Drink driving is bad! speeding is baad! disobaying the law is baaaad!
but in all circumstances, the degree that the law was broken by must be taken into account when the sentance is handed down.

K-9

Deleted User wrote: »

This thread does highlight one of the failings of the curent system (pass/fail) nothing in between!

Should there be a situation where the penalties are graded on exactly how drunk the driver actually is.

I won't define breathalyser readings, but general terms:

Slightly tipsy - (A traffic cop wouldn't stop this driver, but is stopped at a checkpoint) - three month ban
tipsy- (A traffic cop wouldn't stop this driver - but was seen leaving a pub & acting gullty!) - six month ban

slightly drunk (A traffic cop would stop this driver as he is acting odd) - one year

all the way up to pissed ten years ban and retake of the driving test.

It's one of these things, how do you legislate for it?

If somebody can handle 8 pints and is a great driver, what does the Guard do?

Ask them out for 8 pints tomorrow night and see can they drive ok?

LD 50

As I don't have a car, no.

But I have cycled drunk before. Not fun. I don't recommend it.

Teferi

rafared wrote: »

No. Never have never will. The limit shold be Zero IMO.

I think there should be zero tolerance on bad spelling. :pac:

Seriously though, you are only taking into consideration your own lifestyle. Don't be silly.

brendansmith

Risk is too high.

Liam Byrne

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Driving while drunk is pretty irresponsible

100% agreed. In fact, I'd go further and say that driving while drunk is worse than "irresponsible"; it's downright criminal! Which is probably why it's a crime!!!!

partyatmygaff wrote: »

irresponsible drivers are rarely good drivers.

Again, agreed.

So if you had said:

The drivers likely to drink get drunk and drive are usually some of the worst while sober

I would probably have put some credence in your statement; it'd be unproven, but at least there would be logic to it.

But the fact is that you didn't say that. You said :

partyatmygaff wrote: »

The drivers likely to drink and drive are usually some of the worst while sober

Which is ridiculous.

Those who consciously have what they can take - whether it's below or up to the limit - are behaving responsibly.

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Why are you so indignant anyway? Do you drink and drive regularly?

I'm "indignant" because your statement was wrong. Nothing more, nothing less.

And ignorant generalisations - whether I've driven once ever with 2 pints or 1,000 times with 1 pint - is insulting, because there's nothing "irresponsible" about that.

K-9

K-9 wrote: »

It's one of these things, how do you legislate for it?

If somebody can handle 8 pints and is a great driver, what does the Guard do?

Ask them out for 8 pints tomorrow night and see can they drive ok?

Yes that's the great difficulty in legistrating the limit! blood/alcohol stats are the most reliable, but the law is so (yes/no, black/white) about it.

Drunk drivers involved in accidents are nearly always several multiples of the legal when tested. that's what makes it so unfair to some one who skipped a meal and had two pints and gets done and the book thrown at them even though the cops being honest would never had stopped them if seen driving along.

MmmmmCheese

What counts as drunk driving?

2 pints?

Liam Byrne

MmmmmCheese wrote: »

What counts as drunk driving?

2 pints?

Apparently, the limit is one pint in the first hour and one every two hours after that....anything over that is "drunk driving".

Strangely (and I've said this before) this means that 5 pints during a long wedding day (say, 6pm - 2am) would be viewed as "safe". I don't think I'd chance that, however "legal" it might be.

But most people posting here are adamant to lump irresponsible drunks with "know-your-limits" law-abiders, and it's an annoying witch-hunt in that regard.

I'd suggest splitting the thread into two; one asking for opinions re "over the limit / drunk drivers", and one for opinions about those within the limits.

The thread title does not mention "drunk", so it covers - apparently - even someone who has a glass of wine with a meal, or a shandy while watching a match, and then drives home, lumbering us in with idiots who stagger to their cars after 10 pints and meander their way home, putting at risk those who've had 10 pints and chosen to walk home on a country road.

MmmmmCheese

MmmmmCheese wrote: »

What counts as drunk driving?

2 pints?

It depends:

your weight
your BMI (body Mass Index)
what you have eaten
when you ate
how quickly you drank the alcohol
how much non-alcoholic dring you had also consumed.

Simple really

mahamageehad

No. and i hate people who do.

drunkmonkey

MmmmmCheese wrote: »

What counts as drunk driving?

2 pints?

they say that 2 pints of 4% beer will give at tops a reading of 60mg, they law allows for 80mg at the moment, so 2 pints you are within the law. In reality I think 2 pints would be about 30 - 40mg if you've had some food but having 3pts may tip you over depending on how your body handles it.
I've blown in the bag after 2 pints and a toasted sandwich, 0% reading.

Liam Byrne

mahamageehad wrote: »

No. and i hate people who do.

Including the responsible law-abiders ??? Sheesh! :rolleyes:

Do you "hate" people that drive at 97 kmph ? Or 104 kmph ? Or 140 kmph ?

drunkmonkey

drunkmonkey wrote: »

they say that 2 pints of 4% beer will give at tops a reading of 60mg, they law allows for 80mg at the moment, so 2 pints you are within the law. In reality I think 2 pints would be about 30 - 40mg if you've had some food but having 3pts may tip you over depending on how your body handles it.
I've blown in the bag after 2 pints and a toasted sandwich, 0% reading.

That's the problem, it's impossible to specify how much to drink!

Atavan-Halen

No, never would. TBH I hate it when people give out about the legal limit and it being too low. Why would you want to try justify putting pedestrians and other motorists in daner, and not forgetting yourself too. Most people would say that a pint or 2 with dinner is fine, but I don't think so IMO. Just make the limit 0, end of.

Smau5

Not yet..

Degag

I have often drove after 2 or 3 pints and don't have a problem with it.

The problem is however that some people can't differenciate between drunk driving and drink driving. I don't condone anyone driving after 10 pints but i know that i am more careful on the roads after 2 or 3 than i probably would be sober. I drive that bit slower and pay that bit more attention to the road.

I also think that some people think that rural roads are far busier than they actually are. I live about 2 miles from home and most nights i may not meet a car on the way home and it's an "N" road. Of course that doesn't mean that you wont have an accident but regardless of whether you have drink in you or not, it probably lessens the possibilities.

In my mind Speeding is by far a bigger danger than anybody having 2 or 3 pints and driving home.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Anyone notice how people only do it out of fear of the law and not out of genuine worry for killing someone?

So many guys I know who would never drink drive all have no issue with driving whilst stoned. I'd get into a car with a driver who'd drank but no way would i drive it myself if I'd been drinking.

lfc86

I dont drive but if i did drive i would never do it , my ma on the other hand she never drinks and drives...... she drinks while she's drivin

SV

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Including the responsible law-abiders ??? Sheesh! :rolleyes:

Do you "hate" people that drive at 97 kmph ? Or 104 kmph ? Or 140 kmph ?

You're putting drink drivers in the same category as speeders?
Wow.


I think people are being bloody pedantic here, it's pretty obvious that drink driving means driving whilst drunk but there's a load here who want to be all high and mighty and say "oh I drink but I'm not over the limit, how am I scumbag !??"
If you're not over the limit then you're definitely not bloody drunk.

Dancor

I have and I was stopped by a Garda, admitted to doing it. Had a chat and a bit of a laugh and was told to be on my way :eek:

Never again.
I hate spilling my drink going over speed ramps.

Liam Byrne

SV wrote: »

You're putting drink drivers in the same category as speeders?

Yup - added risk to yourself and other road users, breaking the law, etc. Lots of parallels. Under-the limit (for either drink or speed) is safe, but obviously further under the limit is safer. Over the limit is unsafe. Miles over the limit is crazily unsafe.

SV wrote: »

I think people are being bloody pedantic here, it's pretty obvious that drink driving means driving whilst drunk but there's a load here who want to be all high and mighty and say "oh I drink but I'm not over the limit, how am I scumbag !??"

No, that's not "pretty obvious" at all. If the OP meant "drunk" or "over the limit", then fair enough - just say so. Do you want to go back to all of the posters who mentioned "hate" and "irresponsible" and ask them if their views still apply to us normal people ?

Because on a similar topic in the Politics the abuse aimed at responsible, one-or-two drinks drivers was so pathetic as to make being "pedantic" a refreshing improvement.

SV wrote: »

If you're not over the limit then you're definitely not bloody drunk.

100% agreed. But as I said the thread title says "DRINK driving". So which are we talking about, then ?

SV

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Yup - added risk to yourself and other road users, breaking the law, etc. Lots of parallels. Under-the limit (for either drink or speed) is safe, but obviously further under the limit is safer. Over the limit is unsafe. Miles over the limit is crazily unsafe.

Well you can't really compare both of them.
Drink driving is far more dangerous than being over the speed limit.
Oh and being far under the speed limit is almost more dangerous than being over it.
I'd also say a sober experienced driver is far safer at 160km/h than any drunk driver at 50km/h.

Liam Byrne wrote: »

No, that's not "pretty obvious" at all. If the OP meant "drunk" or "over the limit", then fair enough - just say so. Do you want to go back to all of the posters who mentioned "hate" and "irresponsible" and ask them if their views still apply to us normal people ?

Well why wouldn't it be obvious?
Why would the OP start a thread asking "Do you ever drink alcohol, not go over the legal limit and then drive your car?" It's like asking people "Do you ever legally drive your car?"
Drink driving means driving drunk, Do you ever hear conversations about drink driving or hear it in the news and assume they're talking about someone who had been drinking but wasn't over the limit?
Don't lie.

Liam Byrne wrote: »

100% agreed. But as I said the thread title says "DRINK driving". So which are we talking about, then ?

We're talking about Drink driving..which means driving whilst drunk.

My name is URL

It's surprising that so many people admit to doing it and don't feel ashamed of it.

I'm not talking about having one or two drinks either, that's relative to the person... I'm talking about people getting into a car and driving when they know it's breaking the law, a law that's there for a very good reason.

It's laughable that some people don't see the harm in it, and yet those same people will be the first to show their outrage when a scumbag deed is mentioned in any thread.

Hypocrisy at its finest

Alcohol is the primary cause of 25% of all road collisions and 33% of collisions resulting in fatalities in Ireland.

http://www.irishmotoring.ie/cms/publish/car/carsafety/statistics_info_drinkdriving/Drink_Driving_Statistics_906.php

AnonoBoy

6 cans of Tuborg.
1 Car.
Loads of Highway.
Hours of fun.










I love Grand Theft Auto.

Mossy Monk

Cant say that I do OP.

brenchman

i'm drink driving right now.

WHAHEYYYYY!!!

GavRedKing

Never done it, dont think I would ever consider it, I go out with my friends nearly every Saturday night and about 90% of teh time I wont drink and I will drive us in, I dont mind not drinking, I'll be out having a good time with my friends and having a few drinks and driving home has never crossed my mind, if it had I would exoect my friends to take my keys and I would thank in the morning.

8k2q1gfcz9s5d4

Never have, never intend to, but nearly did once until one of my mates told me off. You can say you will never do it, but if you are stuck without a lift, you have the car and depending on how sober you "think" you are its a different story. I tend not to bring the car out unless im sure i have a lift home, or in the designated driver

TripleXXX

I don't do it myself, but I know a guy who does it all the time for years and has been getting away with it. Sooner or later he'll get caught regardless.

Degag

SV wrote: »

I'd also say a sober experienced driver is far safer at 160km/h than any drunk driver at 50km/h.

I reckon that's one of the most ridiculous statements i have ever read on Boards. I can say for a fact i'd rather sit into a car with a driver after 6 pints, never mind one or two, at 50kmh than anyone driving at 160kmh.

SV

Degag wrote: »

I reckon that's one of the most ridiculous statements i have ever read on Boards. I can say for a fact i'd rather sit into a car with a driver after 6 pints, never mind one or two, at 50kmh than anyone driving at 160kmh.

lol, you clearly don't have a clue what 160km/h is like do you?

I have driven home with a fair few pints on me on a few rare occasions(some of which were in the UK so no random breath testing) but not regularly and I havnt done it for a quite a while its just too risky with all the breath testing. I would often drive after a pint of two though and have probably been over the limit a good few times when driving the next day.

Drink driving is still acceptable out around the country side contrary to what people say about it no longer being socially acceptable. You are much more likely to hear people complaining about not being able to have a few pints and drive home than complain about people who drink and drive.

Degag

SV wrote: »

lol, you clearly don't have a clue what 160km/h is like do you?

Dangerous?

Way to contradict yourself, you advocate driving at 160 km/h yet villify someone driving after two pints.

citizen_p

i know people tht do thogh.......idiots

SV

Degag wrote: »

Dangerous?

Way to contradict yourself, you advocate driving at 160 km/h yet villify someone driving after two pints.

It's not dangerous in the slightest.
Driving drunk is though.

Degag

SV wrote: »

It's not dangerous in the slightest.
Driving drunk is though.

The mind boggles if you think that driving at 160 km/h is not slightly dangerous.

partyatmygaff

Driving at even 250 KM/H is not dangerous, hell even driving at 300 KM/H can be safe depending on the driver.

The autobahn in germany has many unrestricted areas, it also has one of the best safety records for a motorway its size. I would much rather be in a car with a competent driver doing 250 KM/H (Which I have been) than someone drunk driving at 60 KM/H.

Speed isn't dangerous
Speed and stupid/drunk drivers is dangerous.

Atavan-Halen

brenchman wrote: »

i'm drink driving right now.

WHAHEYYYYY!!!

Wow! drinking, driving and posting on boards, how DO you do it

omahaid

partyatmygaff wrote: »

I would much rather be in a car with a competent driver doing 250 KM/H

I would **** myself if I was in a car with someone driving at 250km/h.