Yep. The ‘same night’ offender has 100% knowledge of committing an offence, the morning after offender less so.

Because he forgets he was out drinking the night before? You can rationalise your reasons for driving (possibly) over the limit as much as you want, but it is a deliberate action to get behind the wheel of a car the morning after a drinking session. Its widely known that alcohol doesn’t leave your body immediately. The Scottish limit change isn’t that huge, in terms of the morning after – its roughly the same as doing any one of the following: (i) drinking one less pint; (2) stopping drinking about an hour earlier; (3) starting driving an hour later. Now if you are that close to the limit do you think you should be crossing your fingers the next day?

To be fair, I do find it confusing, who measures their own drinking in the same terms as the law? But I’m not an idiot, so faced with the tricky question of “can I have 1 pint, or not” I have no pints, rather than going “it’s a bit confusing this” and having 3.

Exactly the reason for my post.

I would feel OK to drink after half a pint, or a small bottle. But I wouldnt out of principle.

Its even to the point that I had a mouthful of beer the other night, then realised we were out of milk. I didn’t drive to the shops, as I’d had something.

As I figured, just had the following conversation with one of the folk that run the office:

“Are you coming to the beer tasting at four?”

Me: “Nah, I’m driving.”

“So’s everybody else – you can have a couple.”

😐

Scottish limit sounds good to me.

Careful Rickon you’re not allowed that opinion.

Thankfully I have three pubs within a 5 minute walk so rarely have to consider this.

I have no issue with people having a pint and driving though. I dont think they are any more dangerous than people driving and getting distracted via chatting, looking at scenery/billboards, any other thing that momentarily takes your eye off the road.

I think the average person can drive far safer after a couple of pints than they can while texting, drinking a coffee, adjusting their mp3 and talking all at the same time….

I think the average person can drive far safer after a couple of pints than they can while texting, drinking a coffee, adjusting their mp3 and talking all at the same time….

Correct. Pursuing drivers at lower and lower limits won’t make much difference. Drink one pint get banned. Drive more dangerously by using a mobile get points. Even the old Scottish limit was less dangerous than using a phone.

Driving performance under the influence of alcohol was significantly worse than normal driving, yet better than driving while using a phone. Drivers also reported that it was easier to drive drunk than to drive while using a phone. It is concluded that driving behaviour is impaired more during a phone conversation than by having a blood alcohol level at the UK legal limit (80mg / 100ml). (A)

http://www.trl.co.uk/reports-publications/report/?reportid=2698

Drink? Phones? Coffee? MP3 players?

None of these so things will hamper driving performance as much as trying to keep an eye on three bored kids who are pissing about and fighting with each other in the back seat.

This should be illegal. There should be hefty jail sentences handed down to children who misbehave in cars.

Its even to the point that I had a mouthful of beer the other night, then [i]realised we were out of milk. I didn’t drive to the shops, as I’d had something.[/i]

I think you over reacted! 😯

Its even to the point that I had a mouthful of beer the other night, then realised we were out of milk.

Worst bowl of cornflakes ever.

Just ordered a breathylser… Is that wrong?

*sits back, opens popcorn/*

No issue at all with people checking with a breathalyser so long as they’re accurate.

I don’t really understand the objectors.

To illustrate why let’s take a couple of possible (slightly extreme) outcomes from someone enjoying a few glasses of wine while away with work…

Fred has a bottle of red with dinner at the sales conference on a Friday night. Goes to bed around 1100.

He gets up at his hotel around 800 in the morning, has a lovely fry up. Feels perfectly fine, reckons the bottle is out of his system. And here we split the story…

Scenario 1 – At 900, feeling fine and confident his body has done the necessary with the alcohol he hops into the car and heads for home. Problem is that bottle of red hadn’t actually cleared his system and he flattens a kid running out into the street to rescue a ball because his reactions and car control aren’t what they should have been. Child is injured. Fred gets banned and loses his job. Fred’s family lose their home, he can’t get another job because he’s got a drink drive charge on him and he’s a rep.

Scenario 2 – At 900 Fred blows into a home breathalyser kit. Crikey he’s still a fair bit over. Decides to use the hotel gym for an hour have another coffee, maybe even s light lunch and drive home later.

In scenario 1 Fred makes an honest mistake that screws up half a dozen people’s lives for a fair period.

In scenario 2 Fred is late home. Gets a roasting from the Mrs as he was supposed to be vacuuming the garden before her mother comes round for coffee but other than that all’s well.

I am well aware before some smart arse points it out that I’ve lent to the extremes of action and consequence but it’s the principles in trying to highlight.

Fred tried to be sensible in the first case but alcohol processing isn’t a perfect science. He didn’t want to or knowingly drive over the limit.

I’m also aware there’ll be plonkers who’d not bother or chance a positive but if they stop a few nasty accidents then great.

Now tell me which of those two scenarios you want to happen.

Now tell me which of those two scenarios you want to happen.

Scenario 3: Fred reliases he’s going to drive early in the morning a fry up isn’t going to make a difference so only has water and maybe one small glass of wine.

I’m not against breathalyser idea but isn’t it better not to have to rely on that as if you do maybe you have issues. If you can’t not have a drink because you’re driving the next day or at least only have a small amount you need to take a look at your life. It’s exactly what I did after being stupid too many times the next day.

Which breathalyser stoatsbrother?

poly
….. Now if you are that close to the limit do you think you should be crossing your fingers the next day?

No. But my point was that you’re not as thoughtless as the person who consumes excess alcohol units and gets in their car. They’re both guilty but in my eyes ones is more culpable of a deliberate breach of the law.

garage-dweller – nice example, well put. At a tangent there’s always scenario 1a which had the same result but Fred’s reduced reactions are not a factor.

You can’t underestimate how luck plays a part in whether people get caught, are involved in accidents so context is vital to understanding and judgement but at the end of the day not taking any chance of being over the limit is an option and one we can and should choose.

deepreddate – No. But my point was that you’re not as thoughtless as the person who consumes excess alcohol units and gets in their car. They’re both guilty but in my eyes ones is more culpable of a deliberate breach of the law.

Both have had excess alcohol units. Both make a conscious and deliberate decision to drive when any reasonable person would not. Both are guilty.

G-D – in Scenario 1: will he really bother to do a breath test if he is certain he is under?

Now consider Scenario 4: he does a test and it says he is just under. The device is not accurately calibrated* though and he gets stopped on the way home, is over the prescribed limit on the calibrated device and suffers all the same effects.

Or Scenario 5: he drives home (either having done a DIY test or not), has an accident and kills someone. By the time he is conveyed to the police station his reading is just within the legal limit. He escapes prosecution. He lives for the rest of his life wondering is he could have avoided the accident if he has been completely alcohol free that morning.

* Given a police roadside test costs several hundred pounds and isn’t considered reliable enough for prosecution evidence, I would be very suspicious that any “cheap” device could provide +/- 1 results with sufficient robustness to “permit” driving with confidence. As far as I know few, if any, come with any validation data that will help you understand what safety margin you need to apply for routine amateur use, environmental factors, the ageing of the device etc.

Poly – Both have had excess alcohol units. Both make a conscious and deliberate decision to drive when any reasonable person would not. Both are guilty.

We agree both are guilty but you see no difference whereas I do. I suspect lots of convicted drink drivers are reasonable people who made bad decisions. Especially those caught the morning after ;).

They’re both guilty but in my eyes ones is more culpable of a deliberate breach of the law.

hmm, you’re arguing semantics, it’s kinda like who would you rather get run over by? some arsehole doing something wilfully dangerous or someone just being idiotically negligent?

I’d say the arsehole and the idiot both deserve a damn good (metaphorical/judicial) shoeing.

Who kills more people? Convicted dangerous drivers or “I just looked away for a second” drivers?

(genuine question, I don’t know but would bet it’s the latter)

6th scenario. He’ll be sober long before 0800.

If you drink a large (250ml) glass of wine, your body takes about three hours to break down the alcohol.

http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/853.aspx?CategoryID=87

A bottle is 3 large glasses. So if Fred started drinking his bottle of wine at 8pm it will be out his system 9 hours later at 5am. With a 4 hour margin for error before he starts driving an hour after breakfast.

A bottle is 3 large glasses. So if Fred started drinking his bottle of wine at 8pm it will be out his system 9 hours later at 5am. With a 4 hour margin for error before he starts driving an hour after breakfast.

No way I’d be driving the next morning if I’d drank an entire bottle of wine the night before. Doubt I’d even consider driving until early evening.

It’s not an exact science. So many variables.

Exactly as mentioned in that link along with this bit.

If you have a few drinks during a night out, it can take many hours for the alcohol to leave your body. The alcohol could still be in your blood the next day

his means that if you drive the day after an evening of drinking, you could be over the legal alcohol limit. For more information

I once jumped into a mates small 4 seater plane to fly from Harare flying/drinking club to Zim Falls as there was a good party to go to at friends who ran a safari lodge on the upper banks of the Zambezi, trouble was there was no actual landing strip at their park apart from the lights of two land rovers to indicate our touchdown point parallel to the river, it took three of us to carry the pilot to the aircraft as he was too far gone to walk the 50 yards from the bar to where he deserted his plane 6 hrs earlier on the runway next to the flying club bar…….the flight was surprisingly professional once he got control but the drop (intentional) into the Zambezi gorge to almost touch water scared me absolutely shitless. I wish I was 23 again,…..those sort of experiences are priceless.

Somafunk – on the flip side one of my sisters SIL was killed by a drunk driver going the wrong way up the only dual carriageway in Zambia & another SIL died after driving into a tree high on drugs/alcohol, I don’t think either of them reached the ripe old age of 25 🙁

Do you know that your alcohol level has peaked at the time you use a DIY test? (it needs to get into your blood, through your lungs and finally out as breath and is influenced by a variety of factors)

The limit in England and Wales is based on 1960s US research where the risk of causing an accident was estimated by the researchers. You might be under the limit, but are you safe? (again, a variety of factors)

It’s not an exact science. So many variables.

A near 50% margin for error should cover that.

his means that if you drive the day after an evening of drinking, you could be over the legal alcohol limit. For more information

Stating the obvious. But it’s going to take more than a bottle of wine for the average person.

DONK
hmm, you’re arguing semantics, it’s kinda like who would you rather get run over by? some arsehole doing something wilfully dangerous or someone just being idiotically negligent?
I’d say the arsehole and the idiot both deserve a damn good (metaphorical/judicial) shoeing.

Not semantics as they are different. Many crimes involve degrees of intent and reasonable behaviour rather than a simple focus on the end result. You obviously view the out of the pub into the car drink driver as the same as the drink driver who’s been to bed. I view one as acting less reasonably them the other.

So if I lived in England and was brethalysed while in Scotland and failed , but would have passed based on the English law would I get banned in Scotland and England ?

You’d get your licence banned, which would cover the UK