podgerodge
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,051
It should be a zero limit - why on earth would anyone think its a good idea for someone to drive after drinking alcohol - a drug that is known to slow reaction speeds and impair judgement?
Zero limit makes no sense, you would probably be over the limit after a meal that had alcohol as an ingredient.
I would be interested in the statistics that point to how many people that have been involved in accidents that were in the 50-80mg bracket. Very few if any i'm sure.
I would like to see some scientific proof that backs this claim up.
Not sure about scientific but a few points worth looking into after reading this article http://www.whatcar.com/news-article.aspx?NA=229461I would like to see some scientific proof that backs this claim up.
If 1.5 pints have no effect on you, why do you even want to drink it? Surely non-alcoholic would do just as well?
Some people drink because they like the taste, not to get drunk - believe it or not!
Stroganoff, sherry trifle, loads of red or white wine based casseroles to name a few...
or it would be so small as to be undetectable in your blood.
But zero limit is what was suggested above - I take zero to mean zero, as in 0.00mg. I realise in practice that in a lot of cases there is a small permissible level e.g. 0.02 - 0.05, but if you look at Swordshead's link, some countries actually do apply a 0.00 limit.
Yes, Obviously it makes sense to avoid booze saturated meals or deserts but I'd be pretty upset if I found myself being fined/prosecuted for having an e.g. 0.01 mg reading - which is theoretically possible under an actual zero limit.
My point being, I don't think it's at all practical to apply this 'absolute zero' type of limit.
The latter washed down with a few toisins of cough mixture.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?