Drink Driving

Chancer3001

I've driven after a few pints. Like maybe 3 maximum. Made no difference to my driving but obviously 3 pints is gonna affect different people in different ways.

Maphisto

The King of Moo wrote: »

Why can't they go to the pub and, you know, not drink? They could have a system with their friends where each week one of them is the designated driver for the group, so they don't have to abstain each week.
Choosing to live at a distance from the pub and choosing to drink doesn't give someone the excuse to put lives at risk.

emeldc wrote: »

I live in a rural area about a mile and a half outside the town. I sometimes walk to the nearest pub for a pint or two (literally) and it would be very often just me and the publican. I'm not kidding. On my way home I would rarely see another car or person. I don't condone drink driving in any way but Jackie Healey Rae had a point.
And just to clarify I can't stand that political clan.

I'm not in favour of drink driving but I do have a certain amount of sympathy for elderly single men in rural areas that live 5 or so miles away from any pub. Sure they could walk or not drink but there are no buses or taxis. There has been talk of cheaper/simpler taxi licences for publicans but I've yet to see these at all. The prospect of car sharing makes sense but as the poster above says its frequently 1 or 2 people in the bar.

I don't have an answer but its a problem that deserves some thought.

umop.episdn wrote: »

A viagra mojito?

Gives you something to hang into going round corners

Menas

I used to think I was ok driving the car home on a friday after a couple of pints (back when the limits were a lot higher).

But once I tried riding my motorbike after just a glass of beer. Big difference. Even just a glass affected my balance, cornering and general judgement. Made me realise that any booze can affect you.

Have not drank and driven anything since.

looking_around

Badly Drunk Boy wrote: »

I'm sure some people would disagree with you, especially in rural areas. In urban areas there's no excuse because you've got more buses, taxis'n'stuff, but if you live in a rural area, in the middle of nowhere, and you want to socialise, I'm sure it'd be tempting to drive 2 or 3 miles to the local.

I don't drive so it's not an issue for me (although I've been a 'drunken' cyclist on a few occasions).

rural areas have taxi's too.

You just might have a longer wait time for it. As it's often only one taxi.

You also do NOT need to drink, to socialise.

If there happens to not be a taxi, organise with a neighbour or someone who drink or who doesn't. Or just don't drink yourself.

There really is no excuse.

roboshatner wrote: »

What do you do with someone that has been drinking and driving the last 20 years.

Never been caught and never been stopped and are good drivers.

And at this stage in there life they think that well doing it so long now they think in some crazy way that is ok to drink and drive..

What do you do with someone like that ?

You man up and report them, one of the days they step into the car after having a few.
You call the cops and report them.

corner of hells

Jumboman wrote: »

Benzylpiperazine.

You are joking .

CFlat

Im driving since the mid 80s and I can say the amount of drink driving going on then was epic. I cant remember ever considering not taking my car cause I was going drinking and all my friends were the same. All night parties and driving home after. Im not saying I didnt do it in the 90s or even the early noughties but it would have been to my local for a few early ones and then home. I havent done it in years now but my old local will still have loads of cars outside it now with lads inside drinking pints. A lot of them farmers in a rural area, I suppose old habits die hard.

Maphisto

looking_around wrote: »

rural areas have taxi's too.

You just might have a longer wait time for it. As it's often only one taxi.



If there happens to not be a taxi, organise with a neighbour or someone who drink or who doesn't. Or just don't drink yourself.

There really is no excuse.

You live in a town?

You also do NOT need to drink, to socialise.

I don't, but then I rarely go to the pub other than for a meal. As one poster said above it was regularly just him and the publican. Anyone just going to socialise with the publican, I'd suggest Interflora.

looking_around

Maphisto wrote: »

You live in a town?

I don't, but then I rarely go to the pub other than for a meal. As one poster said above it was regularly just him and the publican. Anyone just going to socialise with the publican, I'd suggest Interflora.

My parents live in a rural area.

Pub has maybe 5 people on a busy day. Local taxi, is well, a local from the surrounding area. 2 drivers actually, they take turns on the days and often only run the taxi around the entire area 2-3 times on a night.

And even if there are some areas with no one. You do not need to drink.

And saying things like "well, some areas don't have taxi's", is condoning drink driving. And it should not be acceptable, ever.

PLUG71

roboshatner wrote: »

What do you do with someone that has been drinking and driving the last 20 years.

Never been caught and never been stopped and are good drivers.

And at this stage in there life they think that well doing it so long now they think in some crazy way that is ok to drink and drive..

What do you do with someone like that ?

Report them!!

No excuse in the world for drink driving.

No, certainly not
I've driven when very tired a couple times and that was dangerous enough, I wouldn't be doing that again

PLUG71

Chancer3001 wrote: »

I've driven after a few pints. Like maybe 3 maximum. Made no difference to my driving but obviously 3 pints is gonna affect different people in different ways.

It makes a difference to your reaction time wether you like the fact or not!!

Maphisto

looking_around wrote: »

My parents live in a rural area.

Pub has maybe 5 people on a busy day. Local taxi, is well, a local from the surrounding area. 2 drivers actually, they take turns on the days and often only run the taxi around the entire area 2-3 times on a night.

So if we take your anecdote and my anecdote, could we agree that some percentage of rural areas have no public transport (buses or taxis)?

And even if there are some areas with no one. You do not need to drink.

OK well I won't but that makes very little difference to the auld fella living up the hill on his own, who's one bit of fun is a couple of pints 5 miles away. It's a problem. Doesn't mean I support him drinking and driving.

And saying things like "well, some areas don't have taxi's", is condoning drink driving. And it should not be acceptable, ever.

That's a bit of a leap of faith there. I'm not condoning drink driving at all just saying that there is a problem with rural isolation.

UCDVet

Eh....first they told me drink driving was horrible. Practically a guarantee that someone will die.

Then they told me talk talking on the cell phone while driving was *just* as dangerous.

Then they told me driving while 'emotional' is just as dangerous as drink driving. Who hasn't driven while frustrated at the kids in the back or pissed off that your boss made you stay late?

Then they tell me driving while tired is just as dangerous as drink driving.

At some point, I'm starting to think that maybe drink driving wasn't nearly as dangerous as I've been lead to believe. I drove for years while chatting on cell phones (completely legal at the time). I've driven while emotional and tired too. I don't know anyone who hasn't. Now sure, in EXTREME cases, if I'm EXTREMELY tired, I'd stop driving. Just as if I was unable to walk because I was EXTREMELY DRUNK, I wouldn't drive.

But it really makes me reconsider the dangers of having a buzz and getting behind the wheel. I mean, it's *just* as dangerous as driving if I'm pissed that my team lost their world cup match. Just as dangerous as if I'm a little sleepy.

Heck, I remember when they used to tell us 'Your body processes one drink per hour' or some such formula. If you'd had a few to drink, stop drinking, wait around at the party, sober up, then drive home. That was the 'safe' thing to do. Now I learn that we weren't helping anything. Drunk at 1am isn't any better than sleepy at 3am.

The point is that your reflexes will be dulled and you won't react or process seeing things you encounter
Your motor skills will be less coordinated which may impact steering, doing other things like changing gear at the same time, etc

UCDVet

PLUG71 wrote: »

It makes a difference to your reaction time wether you like the fact or not!!

So does being a woman.
So does being old.
http://www.brianmac.co.uk/pictures/physiology/reactiongraph.gif

So does playing the radio.
http://www.drdriving.org/misc/music_strick_report.html

I'd fully support a definition of what a safe minimum reaction time is, and adjust the laws accordingly, but I can't remember anyone ever telling me what reaction time I need to drive safely. I've just always been told, if I drink a beer, well....I'm *slower* than I would be otherwise. It's hard to put an meaningful value on that. Sure, okay. But If I turn 35, I'm *slower* than I was at 34.

At some point, it's a problem. I'm not saying otherwise. I just have no idea when it becomes a problem.

MajorMax

I knew a man in the midlands, many years ago. A lifelong pioneer and leader of the community.

One night he's driving home, quite late and he has a crash. Totally and completely the fault of the other driver. A drunk driver. That drunk driver died of his injuries. The pioneer was unscathed.

That experience haunted the Pioneer, so even if you only kill yourself drink driving, you can affect other people

Drink drivers are scum. This is a non debatable point, this is a fact. Anyone that condones or excuses it are scum (Healy Rae, I'm looking at you, capboy)

If you drink and drive, I would reccomend you hop into a nice warm bath and bring a nice toaster in with you, Don't forget to make sure the toaster is plugged in (normally that would go without saying, but we're dealing with semi functional morons here), save everyone the time and effort of scraping your worthless carcess off the road or the bodies of your victims

Gannicus

Banjo String wrote: »

There really isn't any excuse nowadays.

Badly Drunk Boy wrote: »

I'm sure some people would disagree with you, especially in rural areas. In urban areas there's no excuse because you've got more buses, taxis'n'stuff, but if you live in a rural area, in the middle of nowhere, and you want to socialise, I'm sure it'd be tempting to drive 2 or 3 miles to the local.

Sorry Badly Drunk Boy but thats bullshít. There is no excuse. Whats to stop them from rotating a designated driver.

I've been part of this argument country people (mainly the older generation) and they píss and moan about how the reduced limit has stopped them going for pints in the local at the weekend.

If you're going to meet 4 or 5 mates in the pub surely one of you can be a designated driver that weekend and someone else the weekend.

Its typical irish drink dependance. Make any excuse to have a pint.

corner of hells wrote: »

Call the Gardai if you see them driving after drinking.

I've done that before. The Gards don't do anything. I've been told by a Gard that the reasOn they nearly never show is because chances are the driver is home by the time they arrive and they can't arrest him based on a phone call if he's not in the car.

PLUG71

UCDVet wrote: »

So does being a woman.
So does being old.
http://www.brianmac.co.uk/pictures/physiology/reactiongraph.gif

So does playing the radio.
http://www.drdriving.org/misc/music_strick_report.html

I'd fully support a definition of what a safe minimum reaction time is, and adjust the laws accordingly, but I can't remember anyone ever telling me what reaction time I need to drive safely. I've just always been told, if I drink a beer, well....I'm *slower* than I would be otherwise. It's hard to put an meaningful value on that. Sure, okay. But If I turn 35, I'm *slower* than I was at 34.

At some point, it's a problem. I'm not saying otherwise. I just have no idea when it becomes a problem.

It becomes a problem as soon as you consume.

I really dont understand why anybody would risk leaving themselves wide open to a world of sh1t when things go pear shaped!

Maphisto

MajorMax wrote: »

I knew a man in the midlands, many years ago. A lifelong pioneer and leader of the community.

One night he's driving home, quite late and he has a crash. Totally and completely the fault of the other driver. A drunk driver. That drunk driver died of his injuries. The pioneer was unscathed.

That experience haunted the Pioneer, so even if you only kill yourself drink driving, you can affect other people

Any death is a haunting experience. I'd suggest that the death is what haunts your friend rather than the drink driving aspect. If you were the first to come across a suicide victim - I think that image would stay with you - Scum?

Not far from here but years ago a fella over turned his tractor and trapped his leg. The Doctor amputated it there. Now I didn't see much but I can still see that image (20+ years ago).

Drink drivers are scum. This is a non debatable point, this is a fact. Anyone that condones or excuses it are scum (Healy Rae, I'm looking at you, capboy)

Its not a fact just because you say so. Its opinion.

If you drink and drive, I would reccomend you hop into a nice warm bath and bring a nice toaster in with you, Don't forget to make sure the toaster is plugged in (normally that would go without saying, but we're dealing with semi functional morons here), save everyone the time and effort of scraping your worthless carcess off the road or the bodies of your victims

You shouldn't have electrical sockets in a bathroom.

UCDVet

PLUG71 wrote: »

It becomes a problem as soon as you consume.

I really dont understand why anybody would risk leaving themselves wide open to a world of sh1t when things go pear shape!

But that's a ridiculous argument.

It's really easy to say, 'ANY level of impairment is unacceptable', but *EVERYTHING* impairs us. Virtually everything anyway. Listening to the radio reduces our ability to respond to obstacles on the road. Having passengers in the car makes us more likely to crash (http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Healthday/story?id=4507310). Driving at night reduces visibility (even with headlights, it's no contest compared to the sun).

Alcohol does reduce someone's reaction time. So does age, gender, and a million other factors. A 20 year-old with one beer has a better reaction time than pretty much EVERYONE, except another 20 year-old who hasn't had a beer. But we still let everyone else drive. They are impaired, compared to the 20 year-old.

Beyond that, even as we age, while our reaction time does decrease, the rate of accidents decreases. Suggesting that a razor sharp reaction time is irrelevant when driving. 20 year old males have the best reaction times, but aren't the safest drivers.

PLUG71

UCDVet wrote: »

But that's a ridiculous argument.

It's really easy to say, 'ANY level of impairment is unacceptable', but *EVERYTHING* impairs us. Virtually everything anyway. Listening to the radio reduces our ability to respond to obstacles on the road. Having passengers in the car makes us more likely to crash (http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Healthday/story?id=4507310). Driving at night reduces visibility (even with headlights, it's no contest compared to the sun).

Alcohol does reduce someone's reaction time. So does age, gender, and a million other factors. A 20 year-old with one beer has a better reaction time than pretty much EVERYONE, except another 20 year-old who hasn't had a beer. But we still let everyone else drive. They are impaired, compared to the 20 year-old.

Beyond that, even as we age, while our reaction time does decrease, the rate of accidents decreases. Suggesting that a razor sharp reaction time is irrelevant when driving. 20 year old males have the best reaction times, but aren't the safest drivers.

You are correct!

However most of the factors the effect drivers are there anyway and are part of driving in general.

Drinking and getting into a vehicle is a personal choice which can be avoided with a bit of common sense and self control.

umop.episdn

Switch off your radio, tell your passengers shut up, problem solved!

razorblunt

What if you're thirsty? I'm not waiting till I get home to open my water!

Bench Press

up to about 4 years ago, I would drink drive nearly every weekend.

PLUG71

Bench Press wrote: »

up to about 4 years ago, I would drink drive nearly every weekend.

So basically you dont give a toss about yourself, your family, other people that you may hurt and their familys?

Cant type what I really think about your comment due to infraction!!:mad:

UCDVet

umop.episdn wrote: »

Switch off your radio, tell your passengers shut up, problem solved!

If any level of impairment is something we should absolutely avoid....why do we allow cars to have radios and more than one seat? We're encouraging people to do those activities.

UCDVet

PLUG71 wrote: »

So basically you dont give a toss about yourself, your family, other people that you may hurt and their familys?

Cant type what I really think about your comment due to infraction!!:mad:

In fairness, that's not the only possible explanation for drink driving....

Herb Powell

My dad sometimes drives back from the local pub. The most he would have is 3 pints, and it's about a mile down the road in the country, where the roads really are deserted at night. The fastest he would drive would be about 30km/h.

I wouldn't ever do it myself, but he seems to have it figured out. He says he wouldn't do it from any other pub.

Now go on and shoot me for defending a drink driver

PLUG71

UCDVet wrote: »

In fairness, that's not the only possible explanation for drink driving....

There is no defence for it IMO SO KEEP TRYING TO JUSTIFY IT :rolleyes:

c_man

PLUG71 wrote: »

There is no defence for it IMO SO KEEP TRYING TO JUSTIFY IT :rolleyes:

What if I had to drink drive to save the world??? Eh? Eh?!

fasttalkerchat

Its not a valid excuse but I've noticed that some pub and hotel car parks have time limits or clamping signs up. If you decide to stay on and have a few pints you can't leave the car overnight for fear of getting clamped. This needs to be addressed.

mezuzaj

The King of Moo wrote: »

Have you ever done it?

Do you think it's ok?

Having recently started driving, I can now understand the temptation to do it. It's very easy to find yourself having drunk a little bit, and being left with options like having to wait for a bus or pay for a taxi, and maybe the hassle of having to pick up your car the next day.

In those situations I think about driving, and feel for a second like I could do it.
But then I think about the fact that I know I still have some thinks to learn and can still make mistakes as a new driver, and adding alcohol doesn't help. Even if I feel like I can drive, I know my judgement is being affected by the alcohol, and my reactions won't be so good.
And it's simply too easy to cause some serious harm with such a dangerous machine, so I don't think I'll ever do it. It's not worth the risk.
But I've been surprised by the number of people who are not bothered about driving after a drink or two, so I'm curious about the general consensus on the issue.

ANYONE who goes for a drink has to leave the car at home. People do stupid things when drunk, like thinking they are fine to drive. People don't think straight after a couple of drinks.

So leave the car at home.

Chattastrophe!

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

Its not a valid excuse but I've noticed that some pub and hotel car parks have time limits or clamping signs up. If you decide to stay on and have a few pints you can't leave the car overnight for fear of getting clamped. This needs to be addressed.

Or people could just plan ahead ...?

UCDVet

PLUG71 wrote: »

There is no defence for it IMO SO KEEP TRYING TO JUSTIFY IT :rolleyes:

I'm not defending trying to defend drink driving, I'm trying to attack everything else that is equally as dangerous. I find it incredibly hypocritical that we single out one thing, but not these others.

It's easy enough to condemn the 45 year-old man who has 2-3 pints over a few hours and drives home with a BAC of .03 as a horrible man who wants to kill himself and everyone else. But what about the Mum of four driving to the dance recital for her daughter? She's got crying children in the back, a lack of sleep, and is running late, she's in no condition for optimal driving, but we give her a free pass.

And the 55 year-old man who has the same reaction time as the 45 year old does after he's had 4 pints, we still let him drive. But he's impaired. He's *sober* but he's impaired.

In all of these other cases we say, 'Well, sure, it's not perfect, but people have to get on with their lives. Can't expect someone to sleep at the office just because they'd have a long and stressful day'. But studies have shown a *lot* of things are 'just as dangerous' as drink driving.

Texting is SIX TIMES more dangerous (http://www2.potsdam.edu/alcohol/files/Driving-while-Texting-Six-Times-More-Dangerous-than-Driving-while-Drunk.html#.U519DPldVIo)
Talking on a cell phone is as dangerous (http://www2.potsdam.edu/alcohol/DrivingIssues/20060830105036.html#.U519DPldVIo)
Being tired (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/31/drowsy-driving-dangerous-drunk-sleepy_n_1557200.html)
Being 'distracted' (http://www.streetdirectory.com/travel_guide/54346/car_accidents/distracted_driving_worse_than_drunk_driving.html)
Being 'emotional'
(http://www.dmv.org/how-to-guides/driving-and-emotions.php)
Being 'old'
(http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/older_adult_drivers/adult-drivers_factsheet.html)

It's just hard for me to view one thing as worse than another, if they're both equally dangerous. But our society doesn't seem to agree.

PLUG71

UCDVet wrote: »

I'm not defending trying to defend drink driving, I'm trying to attack everything else that is equally as dangerous. I find it incredibly hypocritical that we single out one thing, but not these others.

It's easy enough to condemn the 45 year-old man who has 2-3 pints over a few hours and drives home with a BAC of .03 as a horrible man who wants to kill himself and everyone else. But what about the Mum of four driving to the dance recital for her daughter? She's got crying children in the back, a lack of sleep, and is running late, she's in no condition for optimal driving, but we give her a free pass.

And the 55 year-old man who has the same reaction time as the 45 year old does after he's had 4 pints, we still let him drive. But he's impaired. He's *sober* but he's impaired.

In all of these other cases we say, 'Well, sure, it's not perfect, but people have to get on with their lives. Can't expect someone to sleep at the office just because they'd have a long and stressful day'. But studies have shown a *lot* of things are 'just as dangerous' as drink driving.

Texting is SIX TIMES more dangerous (http://www2.potsdam.edu/alcohol/files/Driving-while-Texting-Six-Times-More-Dangerous-than-Driving-while-Drunk.html#.U519DPldVIo)
Talking on a cell phone is as dangerous (http://www2.potsdam.edu/alcohol/DrivingIssues/20060830105036.html#.U519DPldVIo)
Being tired (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/31/drowsy-driving-dangerous-drunk-sleepy_n_1557200.html)
Being 'distracted' (http://www.streetdirectory.com/travel_guide/54346/car_accidents/distracted_driving_worse_than_drunk_driving.html)
Being 'emotional'
(http://www.dmv.org/how-to-guides/driving-and-emotions.php)
Being 'old'
(http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/older_adult_drivers/adult-drivers_factsheet.html)

It's just hard for me to view one thing as worse than another, if they're both equally dangerous. But our society doesn't seem to agree.

Wow!

Ok I see your point but surely drink driving is a bigger problem?

Menas

UCDVet wrote: »

I'm not defending trying to defend drink driving, I'm trying to attack everything else that is equally as dangerous. I find it incredibly hypocritical that we single out one thing, but not these others.

It's easy enough to condemn the 45 year-old man who has 2-3 pints over a few hours and drives home with a BAC of .03 as a horrible man who wants to kill himself and everyone else. But what about the Mum of four driving to the dance recital for her daughter? She's got crying children in the back, a lack of sleep, and is running late, she's in no condition for optimal driving, but we give her a free pass.

And the 55 year-old man who has the same reaction time as the 45 year old does after he's had 4 pints, we still let him drive. But he's impaired. He's *sober* but he's impaired.

In all of these other cases we say, 'Well, sure, it's not perfect, but people have to get on with their lives. Can't expect someone to sleep at the office just because they'd have a long and stressful day'. But studies have shown a *lot* of things are 'just as dangerous' as drink driving.

Texting is SIX TIMES more dangerous (http://www2.potsdam.edu/alcohol/files/Driving-while-Texting-Six-Times-More-Dangerous-than-Driving-while-Drunk.html#.U519DPldVIo)
Talking on a cell phone is as dangerous (http://www2.potsdam.edu/alcohol/DrivingIssues/20060830105036.html#.U519DPldVIo)
Being tired (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/31/drowsy-driving-dangerous-drunk-sleepy_n_1557200.html)
Being 'distracted' (http://www.streetdirectory.com/travel_guide/54346/car_accidents/distracted_driving_worse_than_drunk_driving.html)
Being 'emotional'
(http://www.dmv.org/how-to-guides/driving-and-emotions.php)
Being 'old'
(http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/older_adult_drivers/adult-drivers_factsheet.html)

It's just hard for me to view one thing as worse than another, if they're both equally dangerous. But our society doesn't seem to agree.

I am not sure I see your point. You agree that Drink driving is bad but keep on stating that other things can also be a hamper to good driving?
Are you proposing we ban driving all together?
Or just get rid of the drink driving laws?
Or something else?

arybvtcw0eolkf

I enjoy a pint or two then riding home after work.

I also enjoy a few after training, two max then its a chipper and a few cans for the gaff

UCDVet

Trigger Happy wrote: »

I am not sure I see your point. You agree that Drink driving is bad but keep on stating that other things can also be a hamper to good driving?
Are you proposing we ban driving all together?
Or just get rid of the drink driving laws?
Or something else?

I'm not saying these other things are 'also' bad. As in 'less than perfect'. I'm saying there are studies that show they are AS BAD as drink driving.

Which means our society has some serious cognitive dissidence....having a few pints and driving is as dangerous as being upset and driving, or being tired and driving, or being old and driving. That's statistically a fact (according to several studies). So either they should all be equally illegal or equally legal. We should spend the same amount of resources advocating against one of them as we do the rest. We should vilify everyone who does any of those things, or we shouldn't. Our attitudes should reflect the reality of the situation.

trancemuzic

Come on , you know i drive great when IM wasted

K.Flyer

UCDVet wrote: »

I'm not defending trying to defend drink driving, I'm trying to attack everything else that is equally as dangerous. I find it incredibly hypocritical that we single out one thing, but not these others.

Thats a fair point, there are other potential contributors to motor accidents out there that, usually by way of distraction, can result in an accident.
But alcohol (and drugs) impairs judgement and can cause your reactions to something suddenly happening to be blurred.
I cannot understand why some people feel the need to try to justify having a few pints and driving is ok. As usual its not a problem until a problem occurs.

Menas

UCDVet wrote: »

I'm not saying these other things are 'also' bad. As in 'less than perfect'. I'm saying there are studies that show they are AS BAD as drink driving.

Which means our society has some serious cognitive dissidence....having a few pints and driving is as dangerous as being upset and driving, or being tired and driving, or being old and driving. That's statistically a fact (according to several studies). So either they should all be equally illegal or equally legal. We should spend the same amount of resources advocating against one of them as we do the rest. We should vilify everyone who does any of those things, or we shouldn't. Our attitudes should reflect the reality of the situation.

So you suggest that if we cant legislate against, for example, kids crying in a car then we should not legislate against drinking driving.

Nonsense argument.

UCDVet

Trigger Happy wrote: »

So you suggest that if we cant legislate against, for example, kids crying in a car then we should not legislate against drinking driving.

Nonsense argument.

I agree. Thankfully, that's not my argument.

First, we can legislate against a lot of these things. Some laws are more difficult to *enforce* than others. But we can be logically consistent. Beyond that....we already have laws that are completely out of whack.

Texting is MUCH MORE dangerous than being drunk while driving. Studies show up to SIX TIMES more dangerous than being drunk. So, the penalty should be....I dunno....six times more than drink driving, right?

http://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Road%20Safety/Leaflets/Leaf_booklets/RSA_Mobile_DL.pdf
According to this, the fine for using a phone is 60 euro. That's it. Don't fight it, don't go to court, just pay 60 euro.

http://www.rsa.ie/en/RSA/Road-Safety/Campaigns/Current-road-safety-campaigns/Drink-Driving/Drink-Driving-Penalties/

If the driver (any category, any vehicle) is tested at the 50mg limit and they are over the limit they will be issued an on the spot of fixed penalty notice, receive a fine of €200 and 3 penalty points

Crime A and Crime B. Crime A is SIX TIMES MORE DANGEROUS.

But the penalty for crime B includes a fine that is 3x the size and includes penalty points.

And nobody has a problem with this. Because we were all raised to think that 'Drink driving is evil' but cell phones, well, they're pretty handy. So despite being illegal, I know lots and lots of people who admit that they 'sometimes' use a cell phone while driving. And nobody thinks they are evil people who want to die, or don't value life or anything else. But we say those things (even in this thread, you can find examples) about people who drink a pint or two and drive home.

Our laws and attitudes are irrational and do not reflect reality.

The Drunken Destrier

The people who keep saying 2/3 pints in them didn't make a difference when they drove are the ones who just haven't crashed yet. If we (and they) are lucky, they'll only hurt themselves, and not another innocent and sensible road user.
Also, I couldn't be more annoyed by the typical excuse of the need for culchies to socialise at the local, which might be miles from their homes. I mean Jesus, it couldn't be more obvious! Just don't drink alcohol then! You socialise with your friends, not a flipping pint. Bring a bottle home then if you can't live without it. Some people are unbearably stupid.

I'd drive after 2 or 3 pints every now and then. Mostly if we stop in for a few in one of the locals on the way back from a match etc early in the evening (wouldn't risk it late at night due to increased risk of bagging).

Some major exaggeration on the effects of small amounts of drink on this thread..I wouldn't drive after a sip etc and people saying anyone who looks at a drink and drives should jump into a bath with a toaster :rolleyes:

Most of the auld lads who drink in my local drop into town everyday for milk and the paper and have their two or three pints before driving home. They all arrive and leave at different times and need their car with them for other things. Totally impractical for these to get taxis as is being suggested by the city slickers on this thread that have no idea about rural living.

Pumpkinseeds

Some neighbours of mine are very heavy drinkers and would have a heavy session in the house until maybe 3 in the morning, go to bed and then be out driving by lunchtime. It's a standard thing with them and they've been doing it for at least 30 years. I wonder what the percentage of people driving under the influence the morning after the night before is.

Pumpkinseeds

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

Some neighbours of mine are very heavy drinkers and would have a heavy session in the house until maybe 3 in the morning, go to bed and then be out driving by lunchtime. It's a standard thing with them and they've been doing it for at least 30 years. I wonder what the percentage of people driving under the influence the morning after the night before is.

Driving at lunch after finishing up at 3 isn't bad. Loads of people would drive to work in the morning after a night on the batter!

I bet a lot of those saying they would never drink and drive do it regularly the next morning.

Little CuChulainn

Badly Drunk Boy wrote: »

I don't drive so it's not an issue for me (although I've been a 'drunken' cyclist on a few occasions).

That is also illegal

UCDVet

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

That is also illegal

Isn't it also illegal to be drunk in a public place?

Little CuChulainn

UCDVet wrote: »

Isn't it also illegal to be drunk in a public place?

Only to the extent that you are a danger to yourself or others. The same caveat basically applies to drink driving and drunk cycling in that it has to affect your ability to control the vehicle.

umop.episdn

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Only to the extent that you are a danger to yourself or others. The same caveat basically applies to drink driving and drunk cycling in that it has to affect your ability to control the vehicle.

Incorrect. No caveat applies to drink driving