Road Traffic Act 2010 - Impact on cyclists

DirkVoodoo

briano wrote: »

330cl = 3.3L :eek:

Where, may I ask, does one find a 3L bottle of Heineken

Woops!

Doctor Bob

4z3nyo2i7f8r10 wrote: »

if ever one was looking for a reason to start legislating for cyclists on the roads then this thread and the attitude of the posters is it.
Breath taking opposition to common sense and the self serving "justification" of reckless behaviour by virtue of some "we dont hurt anyone except ourselves" deluded logic just serves to inform our legislature that we need to equip the gardai with a whole suite of new laws to get to grips with cyclists who think they are above the law. More of this sort of thing I say!

My solution to drunk cyclists, when the gardai aren't around is simple: a large roll of duct tape and use it to tape the drunkard to the nearest pole. Lock his bicycle to the pole as well and it can be a little monument to road safety.
By morning he'll be right as rain and can be safely released:cool:

At the risk of appearing to engage with your input, I might make one observation- you are suggesting that the appropriate response to someone thinking they are above the law is... to act as if you are above the law.

Duly noted.

worded

Cabaal wrote: »

Awww thats ok then,

I know a motorist who drove home one night after drinking
He also did the same and drove following the white line, he drove slowly, he had the windows open so he could hear other cars etc and watched out for things.

He made it home ok so its all good, clearly its ok if you arrive home safe and do all of the above.

This is the mentality that made people in Ireland for years think it was ok to drink drive, I honestly can't believe it still exists

I honestly cant believe that you honestly cant believe.

DirkVoodoo

Cabaal wrote: »

I know a motorist who drove home one night after drinking
He also did the same and drove following the white line, he drove slowly, he had the windows open so he could hear other cars etc and watched out for things.

He made it home ok so its all good, clearly its ok if you arrive home safe and do all of the above.

This is the mentality that made people in Ireland for years think it was ok to drink drive, I honestly can't believe it still exists

I just don't understand how you can't distinguish between a car and a bike. I mean, if a guy on a bike swerves off the road he will probably hit the kerb, fall off and have a few cuts and bruises that he will curse in the morning. Are you saying if I drive my car off the road and onto a footpath at a similar speed (this is assuming the drunk driver is ONLY going at the same speed as the bike), I will fall out the door and cut my arms and knees?

The evidence is there to support the introduction of lower limits for drink driving in Ireland. I will ask once again where are all the road deaths caused by drunk cyclists? If I'm driving home at night I find that a guy wobbling on a bike presents the same risk to me and other road users as a guy stumbling across the road. Drive through Donnybrook after Wesley has been on and you will see. By the way, I'm not condoning it and like I said way back it's good to see it being tackled, but I do have issue with you thinking that drink driving and drink cycling are equally dangerous on our roads.

Lumen

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

The evidence is there to support the introduction of lower limits for drink driving in Ireland.

Is it?

DirkVoodoo

Lumen wrote: »

Is it?

International research indicates that alcohol is a contributory factor in up to 40% of road collisions and in Ireland, it is conservatively estimated that alcohol is the primary cause of 25% of all road collisions and 33% of collisions resulting in fatalities.

Profile of the crashes
• 559 (56.2%) crashes were single vehicle crashes.
• Over half (611, 55.3%) of those killed in all crashes were drivers (this includes
those driving motor cycles), 249 (22.5%) were passengers, 205 (18.6%) were
pedestrians, 34 (3.1%) were cyclists, with 6 (0.5%) classified as other.
Crashes where alcohol was a factor
• Alcohol was a factor in 309 (31.0%) fatal crashes and not a factor in 346
(34.8%). An alcohol test was not available or not done for 340 (34.2%)
crashes.
• There were 110 (36.5%) alcohol related fatal crashes in 2003, 95 (28.4%) in
2004 and 104 (28.9%) in 2005. Differences between years were not
statistically significant.
• Alcohol related crashes were twice as likely to occur on Saturdays or Sundays
than other days of the week (Odds ratio: 2.1; CI:1.6-2.8, P<0.00001).
• Almost two-thirds (199, 64.4%) of alcohol related crashes occur between
22.00 hours on Friday night and 08.00 hours on Monday mornings and are
almost three times more likely at these times than other times of the week
(Odds ratio: 2.7; CI:2.0-3.6, P<0.00001).
Profile of those killed and their alcohol levels
Drivers
• 222 (36.3%) of killed drivers had BACs ≥ 20 mg/100ml.
• 187 (30.6%) of the killed drivers were over the legal limit.
• Males were more likely than females to be over the legal limit.
• The mean or average BAC level was 88.9mg/100ml.
• The mean BAC for males was 95.6mg/100ml and for females was 56.0
mg/100ml.
• Age specific rates per 100,000 population for those with BAC levels ≥ 20
mg/100ml and those with BAC levels >80mg/100ml (the legal limit for
driving) were calculated. The rates in both categories were highest for
those aged 20 to 34 years and lowest for those aged 60 to 69 years.
• Motorcycle drivers were no more likely or less likely than other killed
drivers to be over the legal limit.

Pedestrians
• 205 (18.6%) of those killed in 2003-2005 were pedestrians, of whom 129
(62.9%) were male and 76 (37.1%) were female. The mean age was 49.1
years.
• Pedestrian alcohol was considered to be a contributory factor in 50 (24.2%) of
the fatal pedestrian road deaths or 4.5% of all fatal road deaths. Forty one
(82.0%) occurred between 8 pm and 8 am.
• The mean BAC level was 113.3 mg/100ml (S.D. 147.7). For adults (aged 18
years and over), males were more likely to have tested positive for alcohol
than females.
• Where pedestrians own alcohol was a factor in the pedestrian death, over half
(28, 56%) were aged 40 years and over.
• More than 1 in 10 pedestrians had a blood alcohol concentration in excess of
240mg/100ml.
Passengers
• 46 (18.5%) of passengers had BACs > 80mg/100ml.
• The mean BAC was 83.1mg/100ml.
• Male passengers were significantly more likely to be killed than female
passengers in a crash where driver alcohol was a factor. Fifty one (36.1%)
of the male passengers were killed in such crashes.
• In the age group “15-24”, which had the highest mortality rate, driver
alcohol was no more or no less likely to be a factor in the crash.

http://hse.openrepository.com/hse/handle/10147/84413

It kind of skips over cycling though (numbers are in that report), so it's not saying that drunk cycling doesn't result in deaths, but the numbers of fatalities caused by drunk cycling are not in the same league as those caused by drunk driving. Like I said, I think it is a good thing though, so i don't want you guys to think I am in favour of people getting wasted, hopping on bikes and getting themselves killed and causing their families and the driver unnecessary agony.

Gavin

I'm guessing here, but perhaps Lumen was querying if there is proof that reducing our current drink driving limits will have any affect on drink drive related deaths.

As in, is the problem with drivers who have had a drink and a low blood alcohol level, or drivers who are well above the limit?

DirkVoodoo

I honestly don't know. Although it's probably fair to say that if you can't get your keys inside the front door then you probably aren't well equipped to deal with driving at speed and reacting to hazards.

A lot of this "research" simply finds what percentage of road accident victims have alcohol in their systems, identifying it as a factor but not necessarily a cause.

I think it's really about the eventual and seemingly inevitable move to a zero tolerance policy. I guess even very low limits encourage people to have a drink and maybe take a risk with being over the limit. Having a drink OR drive system is probably going to happen.

Anyway, probably moving slightly off topic but I would have thought that yes, there is proof to support that drink driving laws have worked in making the roads safer.

Lumen

Gavin wrote: »

I'm guessing here, but perhaps Lumen was querying if there is proof that reducing our current drink driving limits will have any affect on drink drive related deaths.

I'm not familiar with the current or proposed limits, but I was thinking of this sort of thing (from NZ site):

DirkVoodoo

Lumen wrote: »

I'm not familiar with the current or proposed limits, but I was thinking of this sort of thing (from NZ site):

I think it's 50 mg/100 mL at the moment and 20 mg/100 mL for learners but I think they might be dropping it to 20 mg/100mL which would be about half a pint of beer, I think.

Stark

Current limit is 80 mg/100 mL for everyone. They plan to drop it to 50 mg/100mL for qualified drivers and 20mg/100mL for learner drivers.