Drink Driving ....
30 November 2007, 09:54 PM
#61
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Swansea
Posts: 643
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i know a bloke who got done for DD, went to court and was banned for 2 years, left the court and drove home! was caught on cctv though and got a huge fine added on for driving while disqualified.some people just dont give a s$%t
i was told that it takes an average person to absorb 1 unit of alcohol every 20mins and 1 hour to remove a unit so 10 pints would take 10 hours to get rid.
dont know if thats right or not, after a heavy session i tend to have a day off driving
i was told that it takes an average person to absorb 1 unit of alcohol every 20mins and 1 hour to remove a unit so 10 pints would take 10 hours to get rid.
dont know if thats right or not, after a heavy session i tend to have a day off driving
Last edited by lightwave693; 30 November 2007 at 09:55 PM. Reason: sp
01 December 2007, 01:24 AM
#62
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 623
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only alcoholic drink I have at all in December is a glass of red wine after I have finished carving the turkey on Christmas Day.
Having been stopped in random stop campaigns several times around Oxford, I can always feel completely relaxed with no worries whatever should they want me to "blow".
I also have a reputation for helping catch DDs so on one stop, the copper looked in, recognised me and said, "No need to delay YOU, sir! Happy Christmas".
I am all for ZERO tolerance with ZERO alcohol readings.
And I totally support random breathalysing.
02 December 2007, 09:36 AM
#63
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Essex scooby less crew :(
Posts: 1,095
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Drink driving is a subject close to my families heart right now, this is what happened to my dads house 2 weeks ago when a drink driver came calling:
Luckily dad had gone to bed 10 minutes earlier otherwise he'd probably have been killed. The bloke actually reversed out and tried to get away but his car broke down. The old bill were only around the corner and got the tosser.
Luckily dad had gone to bed 10 minutes earlier otherwise he'd probably have been killed. The bloke actually reversed out and tried to get away but his car broke down. The old bill were only around the corner and got the tosser.
02 December 2007, 11:02 AM
#65
Seeing as people who are caught under the current levels are so pitifully punished, this simply seems like another cynical idea to enable the authorities to fine otherwise law-abiding citizens who might like to have *A* glass of wine with dinner when they go out.
If I'm driving, gone for a meal and am not going to be driving again for a couple of hours, I will have *A* drink with a meal. I see nothing wrong with that at all, the suggestion that a single unit of alcohol is going to turn you into some drunk killing machine is as blatantly stupid as suggesting doing 75 in a 70 makes you a reckless maniac. If I know I will need to drive the next day, I might go out and have a couple of pints, but I won't get hammered.
Personally, I think the law is perfectly sound as it stands. What is needed is for those who get caught drink driving to face suitable punishments - anyone who is caught twice, in my opinion, should never hold a licence again.
And then the Law allows utter nonsense such as this -
http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/news/...A29%3A02%3A463
A driver who killed FIVE people has his sentence reduced from the already pitiful 8 1/2 years to 6 1/2 years because "he didn't mean to do it".
We do not need "Zero Tolerance", we need proper punishment for those who break the law as it stands.
If I'm driving, gone for a meal and am not going to be driving again for a couple of hours, I will have *A* drink with a meal. I see nothing wrong with that at all, the suggestion that a single unit of alcohol is going to turn you into some drunk killing machine is as blatantly stupid as suggesting doing 75 in a 70 makes you a reckless maniac. If I know I will need to drive the next day, I might go out and have a couple of pints, but I won't get hammered.
Personally, I think the law is perfectly sound as it stands. What is needed is for those who get caught drink driving to face suitable punishments - anyone who is caught twice, in my opinion, should never hold a licence again.
And then the Law allows utter nonsense such as this -
http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/news/...A29%3A02%3A463
A driver who killed FIVE people has his sentence reduced from the already pitiful 8 1/2 years to 6 1/2 years because "he didn't mean to do it".
We do not need "Zero Tolerance", we need proper punishment for those who break the law as it stands.
Last edited by Prasius; 02 December 2007 at 11:09 AM.
02 December 2007, 11:15 AM
#67
I would suggest that if someones confused by the drink drive limit then they're possibly a bit too confused to be able to drive in the first place.
Have we just given up on expecting people to have some common sense in this country?
Have we just given up on expecting people to have some common sense in this country?
02 December 2007, 11:42 AM
#68
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seeing as people who are caught under the current levels are so pitifully punished, this simply seems like another cynical idea to enable the authorities to fine otherwise law-abiding citizens who might like to have *A* glass of wine with dinner when they go out.
If I'm driving, gone for a meal and am not going to be driving again for a couple of hours, I will have *A* drink with a meal. I see nothing wrong with that at all, the suggestion that a single unit of alcohol is going to turn you into some drunk killing machine is as blatantly stupid as suggesting doing 75 in a 70 makes you a reckless maniac. If I know I will need to drive the next day, I might go out and have a couple of pints, but I won't get hammered.
Personally, I think the law is perfectly sound as it stands. What is needed is for those who get caught drink driving to face suitable punishments - anyone who is caught twice, in my opinion, should never hold a licence again.
And then the Law allows utter nonsense such as this -
http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/news/...A29%3A02%3A463
A driver who killed FIVE people has his sentence reduced from the already pitiful 8 1/2 years to 6 1/2 years because "he didn't mean to do it".
We do not need "Zero Tolerance", we need proper punishment for those who break the law as it stands.
If I'm driving, gone for a meal and am not going to be driving again for a couple of hours, I will have *A* drink with a meal. I see nothing wrong with that at all, the suggestion that a single unit of alcohol is going to turn you into some drunk killing machine is as blatantly stupid as suggesting doing 75 in a 70 makes you a reckless maniac. If I know I will need to drive the next day, I might go out and have a couple of pints, but I won't get hammered.
Personally, I think the law is perfectly sound as it stands. What is needed is for those who get caught drink driving to face suitable punishments - anyone who is caught twice, in my opinion, should never hold a licence again.
And then the Law allows utter nonsense such as this -
http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/news/...A29%3A02%3A463
A driver who killed FIVE people has his sentence reduced from the already pitiful 8 1/2 years to 6 1/2 years because "he didn't mean to do it".
We do not need "Zero Tolerance", we need proper punishment for those who break the law as it stands.
Les
02 December 2007, 02:12 PM
#70
Track Day Organiser
Seeing as people who are caught under the current levels are so pitifully punished, this simply seems like another cynical idea to enable the authorities to fine otherwise law-abiding citizens who might like to have *A* glass of wine with dinner when they go out.
If I'm driving, gone for a meal and am not going to be driving again for a couple of hours, I will have *A* drink with a meal. I see nothing wrong with that at all, the suggestion that a single unit of alcohol is going to turn you into some drunk killing machine is as blatantly stupid as suggesting doing 75 in a 70 makes you a reckless maniac. If I know I will need to drive the next day, I might go out and have a couple of pints, but I won't get hammered.
Personally, I think the law is perfectly sound as it stands. What is needed is for those who get caught drink driving to face suitable punishments - anyone who is caught twice, in my opinion, should never hold a licence again.
And then the Law allows utter nonsense such as this -
http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/news/...A29%3A02%3A463
A driver who killed FIVE people has his sentence reduced from the already pitiful 8 1/2 years to 6 1/2 years because "he didn't mean to do it".
We do not need "Zero Tolerance", we need proper punishment for those who break the law as it stands.
If I'm driving, gone for a meal and am not going to be driving again for a couple of hours, I will have *A* drink with a meal. I see nothing wrong with that at all, the suggestion that a single unit of alcohol is going to turn you into some drunk killing machine is as blatantly stupid as suggesting doing 75 in a 70 makes you a reckless maniac. If I know I will need to drive the next day, I might go out and have a couple of pints, but I won't get hammered.
Personally, I think the law is perfectly sound as it stands. What is needed is for those who get caught drink driving to face suitable punishments - anyone who is caught twice, in my opinion, should never hold a licence again.
And then the Law allows utter nonsense such as this -
http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/news/...A29%3A02%3A463
A driver who killed FIVE people has his sentence reduced from the already pitiful 8 1/2 years to 6 1/2 years because "he didn't mean to do it".
We do not need "Zero Tolerance", we need proper punishment for those who break the law as it stands.
I have to say that sums my opinion up in a nutshell
02 December 2007, 04:23 PM
#71
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Wanting the English to come first in England for a change!
Posts: 2,091
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why zero tolerance, i live miles away from a decent pub, and with no public transport and no taxis unless you book the day before and pay throught the nose to be driven in a j reg sierra, if i want to go out for a couple of hours my only real option is to drive, so why cant i have two pints in three hours then drive home, i know im perfectly able to drive like that, and i read an article once, and a 25 year old at twice the limit still had a better reaction time than a sober 65 year old!
and as for the idiots who are saying "instant five year ban and custodial sentence" shut up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I myself was done in 2000, cos i had two pints with a meal but had to leave early, got pulled and done, was over by 1mg, do you think that deserves a five year ban and a custodial sentence!!!
Zero tolerance is not the way to go, otherwise everyone on medication should be done aswell, cos some types slow your reactions down more than alocohol!
and as for the idiots who are saying "instant five year ban and custodial sentence" shut up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I myself was done in 2000, cos i had two pints with a meal but had to leave early, got pulled and done, was over by 1mg, do you think that deserves a five year ban and a custodial sentence!!!
Zero tolerance is not the way to go, otherwise everyone on medication should be done aswell, cos some types slow your reactions down more than alocohol!
02 December 2007, 06:51 PM
#72
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Brecon
Posts: 707
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know damn well 90% of you are hypocrites and have on at LEAST 1 occasion driven over the limit. I bet even those banging on about tougher this and that have done it.
Sometimes the people getting caught and banned are just unlucky, the vast majority here are just lucky it wasn't their turn.
Sometimes the people getting caught and banned are just unlucky, the vast majority here are just lucky it wasn't their turn.
02 December 2007, 07:02 PM
#74
and as for the idiots who are saying "instant five year ban and custodial sentence" shut up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I myself was done in 2000, cos i had two pints with a meal but had to leave early, got pulled and done, was over by 1mg, do you think that deserves a five year ban and a custodial sentence!!!
I myself was done in 2000, cos i had two pints with a meal but had to leave early, got pulled and done, was over by 1mg, do you think that deserves a five year ban and a custodial sentence!!!
A pint of a glass of wine will NOT put you over the limit. If you are over the current limit, no sympathy from me.
Last edited by Prasius; 02 December 2007 at 07:04 PM.
03 December 2007, 11:03 AM
#77
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know damn well 90% of you are hypocrites and have on at LEAST 1 occasion driven over the limit. I bet even those banging on about tougher this and that have done it.
Sometimes the people getting caught and banned are just unlucky, the vast majority here are just lucky it wasn't their turn.
Sometimes the people getting caught and banned are just unlucky, the vast majority here are just lucky it wasn't their turn.
If you can't then you would do well to wind your neck instead of making wild accusations!
Les
03 December 2007, 11:29 AM
#79
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 12,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The average person metabolizes 1 unit of alcohol per hour. So long as you're not knocking back pint after pint or glass of wine after wine per hour, then you will get rid of the alcohol as you drink it. Be sensible, combine drinking with food, take your time and there wont be any problems.
If you're going on a bender, then leave the car at home, catch a taxi etc.
Andy
If you're going on a bender, then leave the car at home, catch a taxi etc.
Andy
03 December 2007, 11:34 AM
#80
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 12,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is where a lot of the cofusion arises, a pint of average larger is 2 units, not 1.
03 December 2007, 12:12 PM
#81
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seeing as people who are caught under the current levels are so pitifully punished, this simply seems like another cynical idea to enable the authorities to fine otherwise law-abiding citizens who might like to have *A* glass of wine with dinner when they go out.
If I'm driving, gone for a meal and am not going to be driving again for a couple of hours, I will have *A* drink with a meal. I see nothing wrong with that at all, the suggestion that a single unit of alcohol is going to turn you into some drunk killing machine is as blatantly stupid as suggesting doing 75 in a 70 makes you a reckless maniac. If I know I will need to drive the next day, I might go out and have a couple of pints, but I won't get hammered.
Personally, I think the law is perfectly sound as it stands. What is needed is for those who get caught drink driving to face suitable punishments - anyone who is caught twice, in my opinion, should never hold a licence again.
And then the Law allows utter nonsense such as this -
http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/news/...A29%3A02%3A463
A driver who killed FIVE people has his sentence reduced from the already pitiful 8 1/2 years to 6 1/2 years because "he didn't mean to do it".
We do not need "Zero Tolerance", we need proper punishment for those who break the law as it stands.
If I'm driving, gone for a meal and am not going to be driving again for a couple of hours, I will have *A* drink with a meal. I see nothing wrong with that at all, the suggestion that a single unit of alcohol is going to turn you into some drunk killing machine is as blatantly stupid as suggesting doing 75 in a 70 makes you a reckless maniac. If I know I will need to drive the next day, I might go out and have a couple of pints, but I won't get hammered.
Personally, I think the law is perfectly sound as it stands. What is needed is for those who get caught drink driving to face suitable punishments - anyone who is caught twice, in my opinion, should never hold a licence again.
And then the Law allows utter nonsense such as this -
http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/news/...A29%3A02%3A463
A driver who killed FIVE people has his sentence reduced from the already pitiful 8 1/2 years to 6 1/2 years because "he didn't mean to do it".
We do not need "Zero Tolerance", we need proper punishment for those who break the law as it stands.
I know that if I were to have an accident, I would be hard on myself being a person of -hopefully- good concsience. If I'd had a drink, even If I was no-where near the limit and, on an intellectual level, knew that the booze was not responsible, I'd always wonder on a visceral level if it would have turned out differently had I not had anything to drink!
The safest thing IMHO is if you have a drink, leave the car behind! That ways, ther can be no uncertainty etc...
I'm not sure the zero tolerance is enforcable though, as previously stated harsher pnishments for those who offend is the way forward!
Ns04
03 December 2007, 12:13 PM
#82
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Next door to the WiFi connection
Posts: 16,293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Id say if your going to have 2 pints and drive your probably better off driving as soon as you finish the second pint rather than having them over a 3 hour spell.
03 December 2007, 12:14 PM
#83
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I should also point out that this 1 unit per hour is not absolute by any means and is subject to many other factors! You can't rely on it! It's just better NOT to guess!
Ns04
Ns04
03 December 2007, 12:49 PM
#84
I know damn well 90% of you are hypocrites and have on at LEAST 1 occasion driven over the limit. I bet even those banging on about tougher this and that have done it.
Sometimes the people getting caught and banned are just unlucky, the vast majority here are just lucky it wasn't their turn.
Sometimes the people getting caught and banned are just unlucky, the vast majority here are just lucky it wasn't their turn.
Not distinguishing between 1mg over and 200 is just plain ignorant. Slightly over the limit is still lucid with dulled reactions and concentration. Unable to walk and you may as well be given a live hand grenade and sent onto the streets.
03 December 2007, 03:20 PM
#85
It's not ignorant at all. Whats the point of having a limit if its not enforced? It turns into - well, as long as you can walk, talk and haven't mown down a queue of people waiting for a bus, you can drink as much as you want.
I know that I'd be feeling the effects of alcohol and in no fit state to drive if I was at the legal limit.
03 December 2007, 03:21 PM
#86
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Wanting the English to come first in England for a change!
Posts: 2,091
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My point is, i was supposed to be at the works xmas meal for 3-4 hours, had two pints, one while waiting to be seated, and one with starter/main course, an hour and a half in my phone goes and my missus has pranged her motor, so off i went to help out, if i felt even slightly the effects of two beers i wouldnt have drove. but i had eaten crispy duck starter and sweet n sour pork(main course), i felt sober as a judge! so i chose to drive,
How can this deserve a 5 year ban and custodial sentence
If all had gone to plan after the two pints i would have had water or coke, and sat there for the remainder and took the **** out of the boss!!!!
You saying this is not any different to the tool who has 6 pints on a fri night then drives home????????? WTF!
IMO the two cases are chalk an cheese!!!!!!
p.s how many of you would have done the same for your missus?????
And as i posted before a 25 year twice the limit still has better reactions than a sober 65 year old, so your reasoning would have o.a.ps banned for slow reactions!!!
How can this deserve a 5 year ban and custodial sentence
If all had gone to plan after the two pints i would have had water or coke, and sat there for the remainder and took the **** out of the boss!!!!
You saying this is not any different to the tool who has 6 pints on a fri night then drives home????????? WTF!
IMO the two cases are chalk an cheese!!!!!!
p.s how many of you would have done the same for your missus?????
And as i posted before a 25 year twice the limit still has better reactions than a sober 65 year old, so your reasoning would have o.a.ps banned for slow reactions!!!
Last edited by GC8WRX; 03 December 2007 at 03:24 PM. Reason: forgot last point
03 December 2007, 03:25 PM
#88
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Wanting the English to come first in England for a change!
Posts: 2,091
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I accept that and wont do it again, but as i said, its different to the guy who drives after 6 pints, you cant treat the two cases the same surley???
03 December 2007, 03:56 PM
#89
It's not ignorant at all. Whats the point of having a limit if its not enforced? It turns into - well, as long as you can walk, talk and haven't mown down a queue of people waiting for a bus, you can drink as much as you want.
I know that I'd be feeling the effects of alcohol and in no fit state to drive if I was at the legal limit.
I know that I'd be feeling the effects of alcohol and in no fit state to drive if I was at the legal limit.
Fit the punishment to the crime. Do you also happen to believe shoplifting should be treated in the same fashion as armed robbery? Or perhaps more aptly, doing 71mph on the motorway should hold the same punishment as 171mph?
It's a ludicrous suggestion imo.
