Forum menu
Having moved from the UK to Norway several years ago i can say that when the limit is almost zero and the police can (and do) pull over everyone and breathalyse, you very quickly get used to this. Been checked on road leaving airport at 11pm, and regularly see random road blocks when I’m out riding early on sat and sun mornings. Enforcement and low limit really works, no one complains.
What about when riding bicycles? any moral difference?
Aye, arguably.... But on a bike ride i'll happily have 3 pints of local ale and still ride home.
sbob - itsin the OP article at the beginning of this thread
So how many lives does Prof Allsop think are currently lost due to drink driving?
"The official figure is about 240 a year," he says, "but what is not reflected in that figure is that there are quite a lot of collisions happening where no-one has been driving over the [80mg/100ml] limit but, nevertheless, they are having collisions that they would not have had if they not been drinking - and the best estimate that we can make of the hidden drink drive deaths is about another 60.
2 pints will put you over the limit for many folk in England and everyone in Scotland ( lower limit)
Just ignore him TJ can't you see what he's doing.
Tuboflard,
There are many reasons why a Scottish island cop might not be prioritising drink driving (until you crash). I wouldn’t assume they can be extrapolated to the mainland. Certainly in populated areas there is a concerted police effort and a change in driver atttitude to “just one glass” following the limit change.
Binners x 10,000
No point decreasing a limit that just doesn't get enforced anyway when all it will do is further damage the country pubs that are already closing at a considerable rate. After all why would I stop at a country pub after riding if I couldn't enjoy a single post ride pint of low strength 'driving ale' and a packet of crisps before the trip home?
Thanks to the 'speed kills' campaign, and the excessively ranty folks from Brake, road policing in the UK is now done almost entirely by camera, demonizing those who dare to drive a few mph above the posted limit (it's a limit, not a target don't you know)!!!
Meanwhile in the real world I witness careless, bullying, inconsiderate and aggressive driving that beggars belief on a daily basis. I witness countless people engrossed in their phones, doing makeup, lane hoggers and tailgaters, drivers with no tax, mot or insurance. People with not a single visible thing about their driving that makes you think they've even heard of the highway code.
Thanks to this countries obsession with 'speed kills', all the above can just carry on as before knowing that they are unlikely to ever get caught . . . . provided they don't stray a few mph over the speed limit of course.
There’s a retiree pulls up outside my local rural pub – a few miles inland – in a big old Merc, first noticed him as it’s on a blind corner and a right bad bit to park, there’s a car park round the back. He always orders a pint for him, and a bottle of red for him and his missus to share. God knows if he has any more, as I only ever pop in on a ride up the river trails, I’m sure he doesn’t stop at that.
Have you know thought about reporting him?
I've always been of the opinion you can lower to whatever you want, but some people will think it doesn't apply to them. I doubt it would have that much effect on safety, but may exacerbate the closure of a lot of rural pubs/restaurants.
The current limit allows people to [safely] have one drink when they go out. Any lower and it probably wouldn't.
Having said all that, I've never had a friend or relative die due to a drunk driver.
2 pints will put you over the limit for many folk in England
I don't think it will...
Just ignore him TJ can’t you see what he’s doing.
I was against the decision to reduce the limit in Scotland. Thought it was quite the over reaction. Having lived with it for a good few years now I’m happy to admit I was wrong and that it was the right thing to do. I never drank and drove anyway but it has made me have a good think about driving the morning after a good night out. I now think it’s time to reduce it to maybe 40 as well as introduce similar penalties for driving while using a phone, smoking or listening to Moneybox Live.
you can lower to whatever you want, but some people will think it doesn’t apply to them
This is undoubtedly true. However, it would still work as a deterrent to most. We've seen a huge shift in public perception of "drunk driving", even since I first had a driving licence. Once upon a time I'd think nothing of having 3 pints and jumping on my motorbike or in my car - everyone was doing it - now most folk woukd consider that to be unacceptable and there's even the risk that you would be reported for doing so.
This also addresses the (lack of) policing argument. Change the law and you will immediately reduce the overall levels, even if the hard core ignore them.
The current limit allows people to [safely] have one drink when they go out.
Safely drive or drive safe from prosecution?
This also addresses the (lack of) policing argument. Change the law and you will immediately reduce the overall levels, even if the hard core ignore them.
Yup just like the claims when wearing a seat belt became legal.
This also addresses the (lack of) policing argument. Change the law and you will immediately reduce the overall levels, even if the hard core ignore them.
Does the same apply to mobile phone use behind the wheel? Penalties increased recently yet I see more and more people on phones than ever before!
I’ve always been of the opinion you can lower to whatever you want, but some people will think it doesn’t apply to them. I doubt it would have that much effect on safety, but may exacerbate the closure of a lot of rural pubs/restaurants.
If only there was a nearby country with a generally similar culture, education level, driver training and licensing regime, that had reduced its limit so you could do the experiment and see.
TJ, I’d be sceptical that two weeks in the jail at a time to suit the offender is any more of a deterrent than a ban. Especially because the daily mail says they are all holiday camps! In my view it’s either a belief that they aren’t over the limit or won’t get caught.
bear in mind that jailing someone for two weeks costs the state thousands... probably about 7000 per head. There’s 85k DD convictions in England and Wales a year. 600M pa if it has zero effect as a deterrent!
The lower limit in Scotland is better as it removes the question fir me about whether you can drive on one or two pints. Now I just don't drink at all if driving. No grey area. It is impossible to think of a single reason why this should not be applied UK wide.
Interestingly my brother in law traveled up from England a while ago and had a couple of pints over a meal before driving, he had no idea that there is a different limit here. Luckily he was staying on a west coast island at the time so it didn't really matter ...
Does the same apply to mobile phone use behind the wheel? Penalties increased recently yet I see more and more people on phones than ever before!
Or maybe you've just noticed it more?
My own perception, is that most people understand the limit to be no more than 1 or 2 pints. And if we're talking 2 pints, we're talking over a time frame...
I'd guess that the vast majority of alcohol induced accidents (if not all) happen beyond this level of consumption?
While I tend to agree that there's no real reason to drink even this amount while you're driving, and that it's wise to refrain. I'd be willing to bet however, that the average person has spent more time closer to (and possibly over the limit), unintentionally, the morning after, as opposed to having a couple of drinks then getting back in the car. Obviously this is just as bad (I've seen plenty of people openly admit to driving drunk in the morning, who would never drink drive normally). But the current limit does provide a small buffer for what could be a genuine misjudgement with minimal risk.
I also tend to think that those who willingly ignore the law currently, will continue to do so anyway. The chances of actually being caught are quite slim, until you're involved in an accident. And that's what it comes down to for many people. Changing the limits will have no impact on that.
For the most part, we have come a long way with drink driving in this country, and I believe most people adhere to the law. We need to continue with what we're doing, and also make it easy for people to travel without driving.
I think currently, the big thing is driver distraction and we would save more lives focusing on how we prevent that: what laws are required, and how it is policed. Rather than nitpicking existing laws that already work.
We need to seriously think about how we mitigate risk in this society. There are calls from the more vocal an opinionated sorts to 'ban' anything that they personally consider to be outside of their comfort zone.
Recently I read a local news article about a windsurfer who went out in some pretty stormy conditions, the sorts of conditions that only the experts go out in. I know him - he was a very experienced sailor but on this occasion he had a kit malfunction whilst some way out at sea. In the process of getting himself back to land (which he would have been able to do - he didn't want rescuing), some people watching called the coastguard on his behalf and the lifeboat was launched to bring him in.
Cue all sorts of frothing and ranting from newspaper readers. Comments included "he should be banned from the water", "he should have to pay for his own rescue/NHS etc", "what a selfish pr*ck for putting the lives of the rescue crews in danger", "rules need to be brought in to stop idiots like him" etc, etc - you get the picture.
Ironic that most of the negative comments were probably from the people who's only regular exposure to risk is the risk to their arteries when popping another slice of pizza in their gob in front of the TV. Also ironic that I also know a crew member of the lifeboat station who took part in the unwanted rescue. He's a windsurfer too. He loves going out in challenging sea conditions, rescuing people and dealing with potentially risky situations. It makes him feel alive and it is why he signed up to the RNLI.
Lets leave laws at a sensible level that give society the possibility to go about and enjoy their lives with a reasonable level of risk rather than try to legislate the heck out of everything that someone else considers dangerous, and if there's some people with real issues, lets put the resources in place to deal with these people rather than blanket legislating everyone.
Does the same apply to mobile phone use behind the wheel? Penalties increased recently yet I see more and more people on phones than ever before!
Or maybe you’ve just noticed it more?
Noticed it more because it is happening more perhaps?
Poly - I think automatic jailtime for drunk drivers might well make a difference. I think given the 300 deaths a year each costing the country a million pounds or so then its worth trying. along with random testing
Re mobile phone use behind the wheel
if anything, I’ve noticed a slight reduction, there doesn’t ‘seem’ to be quite as many people doing it nowadays.
however, #anecdotal.
There are calls from the more vocal an opinionated sorts to ‘ban’ anything that they personally consider to be outside of their comfort zone.
Can we ban straw men?
I think pointing out that 15% of all road fatalities are down to drink driving shows that it's a problem, however that 15% is caused by people who are above the current limit.
I think as with many things if the current law was enforced properly it would be far more effective than some change in the law to "give a better message".
As for what's the argument against it? Reasonable freedom. When I become benevolent dictator I'm banning all private motor vehicles from city centres, and restricting their access to residential areas, as well as mandating minimum exercise levels punishable by brutal public execution as it'll save lives overall. But until then I have to live and let live.
What about when riding bicycles? any moral difference? You could cause a bus full of pensioners to swerve that than mows down a queue of folk waiting for something – bosh – 100 dead.
That bus driver would be in court, pretty sure PCV drivers are trained to go for the objectively least worst option. Sadly that's the bike in this case. If I'm wrong and thats just a myth feel free to ignore that.
FWIW though you can still be done for "drunk in charge". Even in my teens I never rode in that state but the bike did make a good crutch 😛
I think poly is right. Folk drink and drive because they think they'll not be caught. I don't think the threat of a jail sentence would be a deterrent - not when compared to loss of licence for a few years.
Noticed it more because it is happening more perhaps?
No.
"Around 39,000 fixed penalty notices (FPNs) were handed out to drivers between March and December last year compared with 74,000 during the same period in 2016, according to police data.
Since 1st March 2017, drivers caught using a handheld phone behind the wheel face double the penalty points and fine. Now, drivers will receive six penalty points and a £200 fine, whereas previously this would have been only three points on their license and a £100 fine."
Poly – I think automatic jailtime for drunk drivers might well make a difference. I think given the 300 deaths a year each costing the country a million pounds or so then its worth trying. along with random testing
Whilst I agree about random testing, I'm not at all an advocate of jailtime. For a start it would cost the country far more than a million pounds or so a year, but also a short sentence without any rehabilitation would simply be ineffective. Far better to see a community based sentence that supports re-education and rehabilitation as required.
Around 39,000 fixed penalty notices (FPNs) were handed out to drivers between March and December last year compared with 74,000 during the same period in 2016, according to police data.
Invalid comparison until we know the level of policing though?
“Around 39,000 fixed penalty notices (FPNs) were handed out to drivers between March and December last year compared with 74,000 during the same period in 2016, according to police data.
From the same article - "However, some say the drop is partly due to less police enforcing the law, rather than less drivers adhering to the law."
Where's your evidence then?
Where’s your evidence then?
Plus the only police I ever see on the road these days are the one's holding speed cameras, or attending to an accident or similar, rather than the ones you used to see patrolling and monitoring general driving standards.
Errr! You've posted about police reduction not evidence there's been an increase in the use of mobiles used while driving.
Oh just saw the extra 60 deaths guesstimate from TJ above - again I wouldn't dispute this it sounds like the best number we have. And in terms of my personal experience and my brother's, I think the limit may be too high - both of us independently have breathalysed ourselves after several pints (over the course of an afternoon or long evening) and found that we're under the limit. In my case it was on a cheapo self test kit, which might have not worked properly, however his was on one used by his social worker partner for clients that might have alcohol problems, and pretty reliable. There's no way I would have considered either of us fit to drive, in both cases we must have had 6+ pints, but we would have shockingly passed a breath test.
Maybe we're outliers in terms of our "well trained" livers mopping up the alcohol quickly, but neither of us drink unusually heavily these days. In any case, as I said, neither of us would've considered ourselves fit to drive despite the breath test saying otherwise, so I can easily see that the 60 could be an under-estimate. I would perhaps rather see drink drive based on a sobriety test though, which would thus remove the "oh but I'm not tired so I can have an extra drink" type excuses.
Errr! You’ve posted about police reduction not evidence there’s been an increase in the use of mobiles used while driving.
Ehhh . . but you were trying to say that because less people had been caught recently, this meant that less people were using mobiles, and I'm pointing out that less people have been caught because there are 30% less police on the roads.
Funny also how the numbers of people being caught using mobile phones at the wheel has dropped at a similar time to the recent cuts to police budgets over the last few years, and at the same time as the proliferation of speed cameras and increasing reliance on technology and cameras to police the roads.
Errr! You’ve posted about police reduction not evidence there’s been an increase in the use of mobiles used while driving.
Funny how the reduction in numbers being caught and convicted has also coincided with a drop in traffic police numbers, a recent large cut in police funding and an increasing reliance on cameras to police the roads?
Ehhh . . but you were trying to say that because less people had been caught recently, this meant that less people were using mobiles, and I’m pointing out that less people have been caught because there are 30% less police on the roads.
Over 10 years there is a 30% reduction. Yes I know that but is that real the reason that there was a 50% reduction in FPN following the change in law in the space of one year, of course not.
Colleagues at work in Glasgow are pretty worried about over-doing it the night before & still being above the (Scottish) limit. I must admit I bought myself an alco-tester gizmo, for when I drive in Scotland 'the morning after'. It's calibrated so I rely on it. I'm surprised after several pints the night before how low the alcohol levels are, well below the Scottish limits. It's a non-issue I suspect, unless the boat is pushed well out beyond the surf-line and into deep water
On another tack. I often stop off for two or three pints near home after a regular evening ride (20 mile MTB or so) I do with friends. Out of curiosity I've tested myself once I've cycled home & been surprised that I'm still under the English limit - must be the exercise I suppose?
My youngest is learning to drive; it's reassuring to hear him say that it's strictly taboo for his mates to drink & drive - I think I even believe him.
Have you know thought about reporting him?
Read my post Drac, I've never seen him driving away. Short of calling the cops and saying there's a guy that might be drunk driving, I'm not sure what else you'd expect me to do.
Read my post Drac, I’ve never seen him driving away.
Errrr! Ok I see.
When I used to ride motorbikes if I had one pint I could really notice the difference it made to my riding ability, you don’t notice the difference as much sat in a nice warm car but you’re just as impaired, you just don’t realise it.
Funny because I was once at a track school in France. One day, I popped into the local village at lunch time and had the daily menu - which came with a carafe of wine. I decided to just have a sip but the three courses were so good I drained the whole jug - maybe 500ml or 2/3rds of a bottle.
Anyway, back for the afternoon track session on my 180mph superbike my instructor said "That's the best session you've done all week!"
At the time, I drank a fair bit and had a pretty high tolerance - I guess. I'm sure your average alcoholic wouldn't be too affected by an amount equal to the DD limit.
I never drink/drive on the road btw although I don't mind cycling after a few. I've got one friend (an ex pro MTBer) who cycles to most social occasions even 20-30 miles away so he can have a booze.
So after the non-existent traffic officers have nabbed you for drink driving you then get sent into our fabulously well-funded and efficient prison system, well known for its present overcapacity and ruthless reduction of re-offending rates?
Not looking at the short jail sentance for rehabilitation - just for punishment.