Should the BAC limit for driving be restored to 0.08?

Commotion Ocean

Italy, Liechtenstein and Malta have blood alcohol limits of 0.08.

In 2011, the BAC limit was lowered from .08 to .02 for learner, novice, professional drivers and those who do ot have their license on them at the time and .05 for everyone else.

There is no proof that the lower limits have resulted in lower road deaths.

Personally, I wouldn't drive after consuming alcohol, but IMO, there is little or nothing wrong with hopping into a car after two pints.There is no harm in having a couple and driving. Rural Ireland has been attacked especially by the 2011 ruling. A despicable attack on rural life. I'm a Dub btw.

Thoughts?

CiniO

In rural Ireland, no one is wondering what the limit is.
We just get out of the pub, and drive back home, no matter if after 1, 2, 5 or 10 pints.
That's the reality.

IMO current limit is fine.
50mg limit allows average person to drive after drinking 1 pint. If someone is big and heavy, most likely will be fine after 2 pints, but it's a bit of a gamble then.

If someone accidentally is above the limit slightly, it's only fine and penalty points if not above 80mg.
Only really when someone is above 100mg, then penalites are becomeing severe, as it's mandatory ban and court appearance.

Lower limit for learners, taxi, truck and bus drivers is good IMO.

Commotion Ocean

CiniO wrote: »

In rural Ireland, no one is wondering what the limit is.
We just get out of the pub, and drive back home, no matter if after 1, 2, 5 or 10 pints.
That's the reality.

IMO current limit is fine.
50mg limit allows average person to drive after drinking 1 pint. If someone is big and heavy, most likely will be fine after 2 pints, but it's a bit of a gamble then.

If someone accidentally is above the limit slightly, it's only fine and penalty points if not above 80mg.
Only really when someone is above 100mg, then penalites are becomeing severe, as it's mandatory ban and court appearance.

Lower limit for learners, taxi, truck and bus drivers is good IMO.

If you''re caught above .05 is it just a fine?

Would any insurance company touch you if you declared points from drink driving? even if it didn't result in a ban.

Taco Chips

What is so hard to understand about the concept that driving is not ok after any intoxicant is taken? Why this constant push and back and forth. FFS.

marno21

People eating cereal out of a bowl or driving extremely tired are much more dangerous than driving with 0.06 BAC.

Another example in Ireland of an apparent black and white drop instead of graduation. 121km/h on a motorway is defined as murderous but 119km/h is safe. In all conditions.

Charles Babbage

Discussion on drink driving always proceeds on the basis that there is some amount of alcohol which doesn't affect your driving but somehow makes a huge difference to your enjoyment of your evening. So it affects you one way and not the other. An unlikely combination.

Eric Cartman

I think in the drink driving laws setup , we seriously need to look to the future. Autonomous (self driving) cars are only around the corner. When laws are being changed to reflect their introduction , I would like to see it sway that aslong as the car is doing the driving, you can be completely pissed.

The taxi drivers and some government regulation champions will cry fowl, but self driving cars coupled with allowing people to use them while pissed is exactly the solution to rural decline and dublin house prices that we need. Lets face it , not being able to get to the pub handy puts a lot of people off, if it was legal to get there in a self driving electric car, you'd think a lot more favourably of a rural house.

Trojan

I don't drive, I just take one of the many high horses that appear to be available.

Commotion Ocean

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I think in the drink driving laws setup , we seriously need to look to the future. Autonomous (self driving) cars are only around the corner. When laws are being changed to reflect their introduction

Even though the car is driving itself, there will still need (at least I think there should) to be a human being with better discretion than a machine that only thinks in black and white.

The person "in charge" of the vehicle will need to be in somewhat of a sober state.

frozenfrozen

is there a difference between 0.05 and 0.08 limits when in both scenarios people will still just drink as much as possible and then drive. so really it is affecting the people who have a couple of pints and drive home an hour later, or drive the morning after a night of drinking

I don't know the answer but I don't think that limit difference will actually affect road deaths. How often is it 0.01bac difference of alcohol being the cause of a crash occurring or not.

as for reducing the limit further, I think all that would do is make it more socially acceptable to 'chance it', as it already is in a lot of the country. In a lot of places it's not even chancing it, they just call it driving home.

uck51js9zml2yt

It should be lowered to zero and enforced. There is no excuse for drinking and driving.
Slovakia has zero tolerance... strangely enough, my father in law ignores it!

Eric Cartman

dfeo wrote: »

Even though the car is driving itself, there will still need (at least I think there should) to be a human being with better discretion than a machine that only thinks in black and white.

The person "in charge" of the vehicle will need to be in somewhat of a sober state.

in general I would agree, don't want a car hitting a wall, or if theres a sensor fault to not use the vehicle , but I think with automatic braking , collision avoidance systems, lane keeping technology , automatic headlights, we're most of the way to mitigating against the faults that drunk drivers have that cause accidents.

Trojan

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I think in the drink driving laws setup , we seriously need to look to the future. Autonomous (self driving) cars are only around the corner. When laws are being changed to reflect their introduction , I would like to see it sway that aslong as the car is doing the driving, you can be completely pissed.

This is inevitable, it's just a question of how quickly it happens.

At some point in the future people are going to be horrified at the concept of letting a human control a 2 ton vehicle in motion.

tom_k

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Discussion on drink driving always proceeds on the basis that there is some amount of alcohol which doesn't affect your driving but somehow makes a huge difference to your enjoyment of your evening. So it affects you one way and not the other. An unlikely combination.

Agreed. I have followed the rule of "When I'm drinkin', I'm drinkin' and when I'm drivin', I'm drivin'" since I first sat behind the wheel. Although nowadays, for me, drinking alcohol is a rarity due to responsibilities (and savage hangovers), I am extremely aware that even after one pint of normal beer, I am moving toward a state of relaxation and pleasant distraction that tells me I'm not as capable on the road as I should be.

For that reason, I'll never have "just the one" and then get in my car. Maybe it's because I'm a lightweight - even though I'm above average in height and build but nevertheless I can't see how even a small amount of an intoxicant would not have some negative effect on my driving.

So I personally would not be in favour of any reduction in the drink-drive limit.

Guy:Incognito

marno21 wrote: »

People eating cereal out of a bowl or driving extremely tired are much more dangerous than driving with 0.06 BAC.

.

If you can invent a bag for the Gards to get the people to blow in to show someone was eating cereal while driving then I'm sure the government will be all ears.

Unless they see the people doing it , theres not much can be done. Especially seeing as theres a culture of other people being condemned for ringing the Gards on people doing wrong (also combined with "you did f all, you prick" when something preventable happens to the same people). Or are you suggesting the Gardai are seeing this and just giving people a polite wave and telling them to carry on?

sdanseo

We have a reasonable maximum limit. Lower would be better, but not top priority.

Shift in focus needed from the easily measurable offences (speed, drink) to ones that are just as important but not enforced at all. Lane discipline, mobile phone use, one-eyed monsters, red light jumpers and so on.

ShadowHearth

Without being very anal about it: how much it would be after drinking one pint of beer? 0.8?

I think drink driving is stupid, but at the same time I think that one pint does not make you drunk lunatic who plows through school children crossing Road.

LeinsterDub

Attack on rural Ireland me hoop. Get a taxi like everyone else.

job seeker

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I think in the drink driving laws setup , we seriously need to look to the future. Autonomous (self driving) cars are only around the corner. When laws are being changed to reflect their introduction , I would like to see it sway that aslong as the car is doing the driving, you can be completely pissed.

The taxi drivers and some government regulation champions will cry fowl, but self driving cars coupled with allowing people to use them while pissed is exactly the solution to rural decline and dublin house prices that we need. Lets face it , not being able to get to the pub handy puts a lot of people off, if it was legal to get there in a self driving electric car, you'd think a lot more favourably of a rural house.

completely pissed in a self driving car?

Car computer: Good day sir, where would you like to go?

Pissed owner: Home

Car computer: You chose Rome

job seeker

Seriously though,

I'd never drink and drive. If I was driving it be on fizzy orange. But regardless of the law on drink driving in Ireland there will always be the few who think"ah sure it will be grand" :rolleyes:

marno21

sdanseo wrote: »

We have a reasonable maximum limit. Lower would be better, but not top priority.

Shift in focus needed from the easily measurable offences (speed, drink) to ones that are just as important but not enforced at all. Lane discipline, mobile phone use, one-eyed monsters, red light jumpers and so on.

Nail. On. The. ****ing. Head.

Speed vans on the M50. Speeding is not the cause of accidents on the M50. Not paying attention, bullying your way through and driving on hatch markings in the race from the middle lane to the exit when the diverge is 100m away are the cause of substantially more collisions.

We've done quite a lot to combat accidents from speeding and drink driving. Now it's time to enforce the other laws.

Guy:Incognito

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Without being very anal about it: how much it would be after drinking one pint of beer? 0.8?

I think drink driving is stupid, but at the same time I think that one pint does not make you drunk lunatic who plows through school children crossing Road.

Doesnt have to make you a drunk lunatic, all it has to do is lower your reaction time by that millisecond that could cause something serious.

Special Circumstances

You have some doozies of threads in your 200 odd posts OP.

The "threads started by dfeo" reads like a transition year or first year college student practising for the women's debating team.

What's your angle?

CiniO

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Without being very anal about it: how much it would be after drinking one pint of beer? 0.8?

I'd say it would have to be extremelly skinny and short person to reach 0.8 after drinking 1 pint of beer (below 5% alcohol which applies to most beers in Ireland).

Me, with my 16 stone and 6 foot, I probably would only exceed 0.8 after 3 pints.

Del2005

dfeo wrote: »

Italy, Liechtenstein and Malta have blood alcohol limits of 0.08.

In 2011, the BAC limit was lowered from .08 to .02 for learner, novice, professional drivers and those who do ot have their license on them at the time and .05 for everyone else.

There is no proof that the lower limits have resulted in lower road deaths.

Personally, I wouldn't drive after consuming alcohol, but IMO, there is little or nothing wrong with hopping into a car after two pints.There is no harm in having a couple and driving. Rural Ireland has been attacked especially by the 2011 ruling. A despicable attack on rural life. I'm a Dub btw.

Thoughts?

If the people in rural Ireland are only going to the pub to drink alcohol then reducing or increasing the limit will make no difference rural Ireland is already dead.

Why can't these people who only want a few social drinks have a cup of tea/coffee or a soft drink? After all its the craic that they want not the buzz, isn't it!

jca

Trojan wrote: »

I don't drive, I just take one of the many high horses that appear to be available.

Trojan......Horse...good one.

twin_beacon

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Attack on rural Ireland me hoop. Get a taxi like everyone else.

in rural villages, the nearest taxi could be 20-30 mins away, and are not willing to make that round trip for one fair.


I think the limits are fine the way they are. Currently, the people that drink and drive are going to do it no matter what limit is, so lowering it wont have much of an effect. Enforcement is also an issue, I've been driving for around 11 years, I have been breathalysed once.

9935452

dfeo wrote: »

Even though the car is driving itself, there will still need (at least I think there should) to be a human being with better discretion than a machine that only thinks in black and white.

The person "in charge" of the vehicle will need to be in somewhat of a sober state.

The person in charge will always need to be sober IMO like having a fully licensed driver supervising a learner driver. The fully licensed driver has to be sober.

9935452

9935452 wrote: »

The person in charge will always need to be sober IMO like having a fully licensed driver supervising a learner driver. The fully licensed driver has to be sober.

I doubt it if the cars are fully automated. How would a driver less taxi (which are often talked about) be possible if there still had to be someone in charge. They are either automated out not if it can't bring me home from the pub pissed what's the point in it? Might as well just have a normal car and if I can ring up a driverless taxi to bring me home but can't use my own driverless car then things would be gone beyond stupid.

Del2005

9935452 wrote: »

The person in charge will always need to be sober IMO like having a fully licensed driver supervising a learner driver. The fully licensed driver has to be sober.

How do you know that the supervising passenger has to be sober? All its says is held a licence in the class for more than 2 years.