"Driving the morning after"

wandatowell

I can never understand people who cannot exercise a small amount of self control with regards to alcohol/driving the morning after.

Whats wrong with having a beer or two, then hitting minerals or whatever for the rest of the night? Nobody really gives a fcuk if you get hammered at a xmass party or whatever except for immature brats who think getting drunk A-S-A-P is the sign of a good night. The opinions of these people ain't worth sh1t IMO

mathepac

daveharnett wrote: »

... and I have yet to see the RSA produce any evidence to support the allocation of Garda resources ...
... but I would like to see the RSA (as my old maths teacher would say) show their workings before they start a campaign.

What about looking at the statistics they already supply on their web-site, http://www.rsa.ie - just in case you had difficulty remembering it.

There's a statistics tab there that has a plethora of data gathered about accidents, deaths, by county, time of day, by calendar year, etc. The data might not be tabulated to meet your exacting needs but a minute or two with a calculator or spreadsheet and a smidgen of common sense should overcome that deficiency, I think. If not, I'll see if I can inveigle Uncle Gaybo to call around and explain it to you monosyllabically.

CiniO

Maybe I can't understand people who claim here they don't have a choice, but have to drive in the morning after booze night, as I never drink much. Three maybe four pints seems to be my maximum. After that amount I should be completely sober within 8 to 10 hours, and so that much time I wait until I drive. If I drank more than 4 pints in one night, next day my hangover would be so severe that driving would be last thing on my mind, and I would probably have to stay until late afternoon between bed and toilet.

Anyway - I know people who can drink like 10 pints in one evening, and wake up at 7 in the morning fully fresh and ready to go. Unfortunately, these people have to know the limitations, and if they decide to drink much day before, they must plan no to drive in the morning and probably until last afternoon

It's like if people can avoid driving straight after drinking, then surely they can avoid driving as well next morning.
If someone has to drive in the night, then he shouldn't drink at all or maybe just limit drink to one. If someone has to drive in the morning, he must limit his drinks to few. That's really simple as that.

corcaigh07

what is the limit now? its not 0.02 is it, a lot of talk about 20mg. it is .05 to .08 and >.08 at the moment, correct? Im out of the country so may be out of the hoop slightly...

I had access to a breathszer(spell) before, one of those that you can purchase through a chemist and normally, I was actually very surprised by how little alcohol was in my system after a bender, usually nil.

I find the numbers for how long it takes for the drink to pass through your system are very conservative. Plus, everyone is different anyway so what's the point? hate it when people spout out the "facts", sigh, common sense is more important.

wandatowell

wandatowell wrote: »

Whats wrong with having a beer or two, then hitting minerals or whatever for the rest of the night?

Because it not anywhere near as much craic. Id be as well pleased staying at home if I could only have two pints on a night out.

-Corkie-

Anaya Lazy Teakettle wrote: »

Because it not anywhere near as much craic.

Well in my case its all or nothing. The thought of drinking 3 pints and then going on 7up would kill me. Thats why I dont drive the next day.

Anaya Lazy Teakettle

Anaya Lazy Teakettle wrote: »

I would definitely buy one, if I could be guaranteed that its reading was reliable. If I could use my one and be 100% sure that the guards one would produce the same result it would be a brilliant investment but I just don't trust the ones you can buy for home use.

Surely you can appreciate that the Gardai's own devices may well not provide the same result twice and also there might be some variation from one of their devices to another, again that's why a blood test is required.

challengemaster

For whoever was looking for physiological effects vs BAC, here you go

Behavioural effects of ethanol

BAC Behavioural effects
50 mg/dl Lowered alertness
100 mg/dl Slower reaction times
150 mg/dl Consistent reductions in reaction time
200 mg/dl Marked depression in capability
250 mg/dl Severe motor disturbance
300 mg/dl Stuporous but conscious
350 mg/dl Surgical anaesthesia, LD1 (Lethal dose in 1% of the population)
400 mg/dl About LD50 (Lethal dose in 50% of the population)

CiniO

corcaigh07 wrote: »

what is the limit now? its not 0.02 is it, a lot of talk about 20mg. it is .05 to .08 and >.08 at the moment, correct? Im out of the country so may be out of the hoop slightly...

Current limit is .02 for driving permit holders, for truck and bus drivers, and for taxi drivers. And AFAIR for full licence for less then 2 years holders.

.05 limit applies to anyone else.

keithclancy

No biggie, just dont drive if you dont feel right.

Same goes for if:
Your Tired
After a Joint
Emotionally Destressed
Lacking the use of one eye
etc etc.

Fishtits

To step beyond the details of this, the arguments about the frequency of "morning after" accidents etc. I think the policy is as clear as it gets, driving under the influence of alcohol is a no no, end of story.

The noose is being gradually tightened, it is now socially unacceptable to leave a pub "tanked" and drive home. I can state as a fact that 20 years ago there was no peer pressure to "take a taxi"

The overall policy seems to be directed to make drivers more aware of their responsibilities as road users, not a bad thing.

I wonder if they'd ever enforce the law on bloody fog lamps...

... or the F*ckwits with the after market xenons that are blinding their fellow motorists?

Fiona

Anaya Lazy Teakettle wrote: »

Because it not anywhere near as much craic.

Well that's that then, hope your never caught out for your sake but as I said, your only 26, your thoughts on this will change when you get older and more sensible

I for one am glad I can go out and enjoy a night on the dry!

-Corkie- wrote: »

Well in my case its all or nothing. The thought of drinking 3 pints and then going on 7up would kill me.

You have the right attitude mate

jamfer

I've read the whole thread and I'm still left with the question: at what time the following day is it ok to drive if you've had 4 or 5 pints the night before?

daveharnett

jamfer wrote: »

I've read the whole thread and I'm still left with the question: at what time the following day is it ok to drive if you've had 4 or 5 pints the night before?

From the RSA, you can metabolise about 1 unit per hour. At 2 units per pint, 4-5 pints means you should be below the limit 8-10 hours after you start drinking. Needless to say, your mileage may vary.

Paulw

daveharnett wrote: »

From the RSA, you can metabolise about 1 unit per hour. At 2 units per pint, 4-5 pints means you should be below the limit 8-10 hours after you start drinking. Needless to say, your mileage may vary.

You mean 8-10 hour after you finish drinking, not after you start drinking.

I enjoy a good night out, but I won't drive until the following afternoon. I also enjoy a night out if I'm the one driving and I just won't drink.

SEPT 23 1989

If I have a heavy night on the Saturday i will not get behind the wheel till Monday morning

langdang

Paulw wrote: »

You mean 8-10 hour after you finish drinking, not after you start drinking.

That's kinda like saying you don't start digesting food until you're completely finished eating isn't it?
daveharnett's maths sound better to me, as long as you're not skulling the pints altogether!

Ellis Dee

spottyelephant wrote: »

What are people's views on this Christmas campaign?

For anyone who hasn't seen it yet, it basically just says booze takes a while to leave your system. I've heard (down in the pub) that the Guards are also running "Operation Viper" over this period to target people who still have booze breath in the morning.

I have a fundamental issue with the campaign in that they offer nothing by way of statistics relating to the frequency and seriousness of accidents directly attributable people still "drunk", by blood alcohol level defintions, while driving in the morning.

After a heavy night, I often feel wobbly and "not quite right" in the morning, and I don't drive until that feeling has left. However I would guess that sometimes even then I would indeed still have more than the 20mg in my blood. But I'm unconvinced that a plus 20mg "drinking" driver and a plus 20mg "recovering" driver are exactly the same in terms of driving ability.

There is a huge wealth of statistics showing that the more alcohol people have in their bloodstream, the slower their reflexes and the greater the risk that they will make mistakes while driving and be involved in accidents.:rolleyes:

It matters not a whit how long their blood alcohol level has been elevated.:) The law is the law, and it says "If you drink, don't drive. If you drive, don't drink!" End of story. Obey the law, because it is there to protect people from death and injury. :cool:

In fact, I advocate a much tougher line on drink driving, such as that enforced in the Nordic countries. There, the police regularly arrange random "mass raids", sealing off entire towns and cities and stopping all vehicles for breathalyser checks. Morning, noon or night. If anyone is caught over the limit, the car keys and driving licence are immediately seized and the driver is taken to the cop shop. I was once stopped and checked at three different checkpoints between Helsinki airport and the city, about 15 km.

Fines are proportional to income and can be in the tens of thousands of euro for high earners. Every police car is equipped with a computer, with access to a database showing everyone's income for the most recent finalised fiscal year.:)

It's time for Ireland to get really serious about drink driving.:D

langdang

Ellis Dee wrote: »

In fact, I advocate a much tougher line on drink driving, such as that enforced in the Nordic countries. There, the police regularly arrange random "mass raids", sealing off entire towns and cities and stopping all vehicles for breathalyser checks. Morning, noon or night. If anyone is caught over the limit, the car keys and driving licence are immediately seized and the driver is taken to the cop shop.

I've often wondered why there wasn't a kind of "flying squad" that moved around doing this - must be considered "unsporting"!

Imagine the hysteria/misunderstanding if they announced "mass raids" - the usual political suspects would be jumping up and down with rage about people not being able to go to church...

Topper Harley

Ellis Dee wrote: »

In fact, I advocate a much tougher line on drink driving, such as that enforced in the Nordic countries. There, the police regularly arrange random "mass raids", sealing off entire towns and cities and stopping all vehicles for breathalyser checks. Morning, noon or night. If anyone is caught over the limit, the car keys and driving licence are immediately seized and the driver is taken to the cop shop. I was once stopped and checked at three different checkpoints between Helsinki airport and the city, about 15 km.

Fines are proportional to income and can be in the tens of thousands of euro for high earners. Every police car is equipped with a computer, with access to a database showing everyone's income for the most recent finalised fiscal year.:)

I wouldn't stand for such a totalitarian state. I understand that there has to be some method of catching people who are over the limit but I don't think it warrants harassing entire cities of law abiding motorists.

I can't believe the Finns actually stand for that but if we end up with a system whereby Dublin can be sealed off and people can't go 15km without being getting breathalysed three times, just to try to catch a few drink drivers, I don't think I'll be the only one who'll want to stage a rebellion.

I'm not advocating drink driving but someone who's twice the legal limit is surely more dangerous on the road than someone barely over the limit and so catching them should be the priority. Not that people just over the limit should be let drive around freely, but the Gardai are already apparently under-resourced and so they should prioritise and use what they have to catch the more of the dangerous drivers rather than starting "Operation Viper", a campaign which will likely focus on easily catching many morning after drivers and at the same time disrupt many other law abiding drivers.

daveharnett

daveharnett wrote: »

From the RSA, you can metabolise about 1 unit per hour. At 2 units per pint, 4-5 pints means you should be below the limit 8-10 hours after you start drinking. Needless to say, your mileage may vary.

There is no way it takes 8 to 10 hours after drinking to clear 4 or 5 pints out of your system, as ive said earlier Ive seen people blow zero 6 or 7 hours after being on serious session, something like 10 pints, double vodkas, shots etc. Im very surprised they did but they did that time anyway.

Ive be bagged myself about half an hour after drinking one pint and I blew zero.

Ellis Dee wrote: »

Fines are proportional to income and can be in the tens of thousands of euro for high earners. Every police car is equipped with a computer, with access to a database showing everyone's income for the most recent finalised fiscal year.:)

That system stinks to be honest and is totally unfair, in fact it shouldn't be allowed. A fine should fit the offense committed and should have nothing to do with ones income.

Anaya Lazy Teakettle

Anaya Lazy Teakettle wrote: »

There is no way it takes 8 to 10 hours after drinking to clear 4 or 5 pints out of your system, as ive said earlier Ive seen people blow zero 6 or 7 hours after being on serious session, something like 10 pints, double vodkas, shots etc. Im very surprised they did but they did that time anyway.

Ive be bagged myself about half an hour after drinking one pint and I blew zero...............

Literally blew zero as you put it or blew below the limit? The latter I suspect. The Gardai generally don't tell you the quantitive result, I generally just get told it's fine.

langdang

Anaya Lazy Teakettle wrote: »

There is no way it takes 8 to 10 hours after drinking to clear 4 or 5 pints out of your system, as ive said earlier Ive seen people blow zero 6 or 7 hours after being on serious session, something like 10 pints, double vodkas, shots etc. Im very surprised they did but they did that time anyway

They drank all that in a few minutes?
OR
8-10 hours after they started they were fine? Your example of 10 pints + suggests a drinking time of at least 4 hours, 6 or 7 + 4 is actually longer than the time you were saying was rubbish???

Gophur

If you're drunk, you're drunk, regardless of the time of day.

The ethics of someone having consumed so much alcohol that they are still under the influence many hours later, is another debate.

RoverJames

RoverJames wrote: »

Literally blew zero as you put it or blew below the limit? The latter I suspect. The Gardai generally don't tell you the quantitive result, I generally just get told it's fine.

Literally zero, she showed me the reading after. Was probably closer to 15 minutes after finishing and it was a quick pint as I only had it while waiting for the person I was collecting to finish, so it may not have been absorbed into my system.

langdang wrote: »

They drank all that in a few minutes?
OR
8-10 hours after they started they were fine? Your example of 10 pints + suggests a drinking time of at least 4 hours, 6 or 7 + 4 is actually longer than the time you were saying was rubbish???

I actually meant to quote the next post which suggested 8-10 hours after finishing, the post I quoted was correct in what it said, same as what your saying i.e. your body starts to get rid of the alcohol as your drinking.

challengemaster

Anaya Lazy Teakettle wrote: »

That system stinks to be honest and is totally unfair, in fact it shouldn't be allowed. A fine should fit the offense committed and should have nothing to do with ones income.

It's actually much fairer in a way, and would yield much better results. A €80 fine to someone earning >200k a year isn't going to deter them from anything. €80 from someone that usually has 120-160 a week to live on, they won't make that mistake again.