Alcohol Limit For Drivers 'Could Be Slashed' , page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 3 times

reply posted on 6-6-2010 @ 06:01 AM by The Theorist

reply to post by CX

As an American, this story is completely irrelevant to me. That being said, I strongly support it. If you want to drink, then either hire a taxi or secure a designated driver. One drink is too many, in my opinion. However I do have some concerns about the proposed changes and a few questions...

Those found breaking the law would be hit with an automatic 12-month ban.

A 12-month ban of what, exactly? 12-month ban on driving? Perhaps banned from drinking and subjected to random screens? Maybe both? Some clarification would be nice.

Random breath-testing, allowing police to stop motorists with no other aim.

I don't live in the UK and realize that your civil right protections are much weaker than ours here in the States, but isn't that a violation of said rights?

The right for drivers to demand a second breathalyzer test at the police station to be removed.

I cry foul on this one. Due process? Fair? Breathalyzers can be inaccurate and the results used in court. I believe this is completely wrong and should not be allowed.

Novice drivers to face an alcohol limit of just 20mg.

New drivers are subjected to tougher regulations. I can get behind this one. New drivers are not really experienced, are easily distracted, and find situations sometimes confusing.

That being said, I'd like to know what defines a 'novice driver' in black and white. Please, spell it out in Crayon.

A new offense of driving with an illegal substance in the bloodstream at levels deemed impairing.

What are the laws in the UK regarding Marijuana, and the like? At what levels are considered 'intoxicating'? I don't live in the UK but could easily see this lighting up a firestorm here in the states.

---

On a completely different note, I question the skyNEWS-UK journalist who wrote this article. I've caught several typos now according to the Firefox spellchecker. Hell, who am I kidding? You UK people spell a lot of words wrong.

reply posted on 7-6-2010 @ 07:34 AM by Bunken Drum

Well, I'm 1 of those that can drink plenty without feeling or seeming intoxicated, but I dont drive after even 1 drink. This is because alcohol makes people more confident & risk assessment is a vital part of driving.
What is the point of removing the right to a 2nd test on a more accurate machine? That seems almost tantamount to admitting that they'd get more convictions with the hand-held... Well dodgy!

I cant see the point of a lower limit for novice drivers either. The limit should be set so that an average sized person can have an average portion of tiramisu, eton mess, etc & be ok. Any more & you're taking an unnecessary risk imo.
Driving whilst impaired by an illegal substance? Why just illegal substances? If the object is to improve road safety, why not any substance that impairs judgement or concentration? Never mind just prescription drugs either. I've seen people become very drowsy after over the counter meds like Benedryl. These drugs clearly state that you shouldn't drive or operate machinery if affected, so if you do, you're a dangerous idiot, just the same as if it was alcohol.
Random stops is a very bad idea, especially if there's then no recourse to a 2nd test at the cop shop. Its an open invitation to coppers to pursue vendettas against people they dont like. There's plenty of that goes on as it is, without making it easier. Its not as if you cant be stopped if your driving seems erratic, or if you've been spotted heading away from a pub, so there's no need for extra powers.

reply posted on 7-6-2010 @ 07:48 AM by Merriman Weir

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by CX

Can one shot, one glass of wine or one beer make a difference? I say BS, but it'll happen. By next year, some people will lose licences, get criminal records and lose jobs over drinking more than half a can of weak beer.

To be honest, I'm more bothered about people losing their lives than losing jobs and driving licences. It's harsh, but not as harsh as losing people in car accidents either behind the wheel or on the receiving end of it.

reply posted on 7-6-2010 @ 08:44 AM by Schuhman2

As a drinker I have thought about this alot. personnally I believe there should be a standard minimum reflex test for all drivers, stiffer drunk driving penalties should be applied if you failed while drinking, this could be used for all people who want to drive- old people, young people, handicapped people, anyone and everyone would have to pass this non- discriminating, non-political, unbiased test and would be completely fair to all.

reply posted on 7-6-2010 @ 08:53 AM by consulmac

interesting post!
i fully agree with the idea, lets be honest most of us have driven after a drink and it's not a problem but I'm sure that we are all aware of the days when even one drink hits you a little harder than normal and just imagine if you had an accident then! even though you are under the limit you would still know deep down it was your fault for getting behind the wheel. Simply put just dont drive if you have had a drink. i dont see it as an infringement of our rights, just a sensible measure to stop all those irresponsible wan%$rs on our roads. A drop in the limit is a good thing, maybe it will make borderline cases think twice about driving? why have the right to a test at the station? if there is booze in your system it's your own damn fault, dont try to weasel your way out of it.

Pages: << 1 2 >> ^^TOP^^