Reducing drink drive limit to 50mg from 80mg


This does make sense for Donegal alright - it seems to me based on some of the high profile accidents reported in the last few years in Inishowen that Donegal has got a bigger problem of young people rallying driving while drunk than the other counties. Perhaps the other counties or the country as a whole is seeing accidents caused by more moderate drinking. Just speculating.
I agree that enforcement remains of paramount importance but I am also in favour of a sensible law i.e. one which does not permit driving while under the influence.
 
The boys from Tir Conaill seem to have a healthy disrespect for law and order. This, may or may not, be due to the lack of public transport in that county which numerically could be compared with hen's teeth.
 
annR said:
TPerhaps the other counties or the country as a whole is seeing accidents caused by more moderate drinking. Just speculating.
Click to expand...

I'm not necessarily saying that your speculation is wrong, but in my home village, 4 local people have died on the roads in the past 12 years. Three of the four involved drunken driving, in each case where persons were driving while very, very drunk. Two of these three drivers served jail terms, the other died in their accident. The fourth was a teenage motor cyclist who was presumed to be travelling at excessive speed along a wide, straight stretch of national road. None of these deaths involved moderate consumption of alcohol.

annR said:
I agree that enforcement remains of paramount importance but I am also in favour of a sensible law i.e. one which does not permit driving while under the influence.
Click to expand...

I honestly don't think a zero alcohol law is sensible. While any amount of alcohol impairs driving, one could also reasonably argue that driving at any speed, fast or slow, contains its own risks. Banning driving after a pint of beer or equivalent strikes me as the same as banning driving at any more than 80 km/hour on a motorway, ie on the surface a laudable idea that would be expected to reduce road fatalities, but in reality a pointless exercise that merely criminalises responsible behaviour and shifts the emphasis of law enforcement away from the real causes of fatalities.
 
truthseeker said:
But I still feel that people shouldnt consume alcohol as alcoholic drinks at all and then drive.
Click to expand...

So do I. It's extremely irresponsible behaviour trying to second guess how your body will metabolise 1/2, 1 or 2 units of alcohol, depending on if a meal has been consumed or not. I believe in zero tolerance. Too many people have lost their lives.
 
gebbel said:
So do I. It's extremely irresponsible behaviour trying to second guess how your body will metabolise , depending on if a meal has been consumed or not. I believe in zero tolerance. Too many people have lost their lives.
Click to expand...

But have they lost their lives due to people consuming 1/2, 1 or 2 units of alcohol? I think not, and neither does the Donegal Coroner.

Should everyone be forced to drive below 80km/hour on motorways or 40 km/hour on other roads? I think not, despite the fact that too many people have lost their lives also through speeding.
 
Without enforcement it dosnt matter a toss - i drive every day and have never been stopped for anything except tax/insurance glance and once for supposedly jumping a light. Never been tested or even had a cop stick his head in the window.
 
A reduction from 80mg to 50mg will have no effect on road deaths, it's simply intended to create a perception that something is being done; as is the case for many laws. It would impact many peoples lives, criminalising them for no good reason.
 
ubiquitous said:
But have they lost their lives due to people consuming 1/2, 1 or 2 units of alcohol? I think not, and neither does the Donegal Coroner.
Click to expand...


Indeed. And back to the Indo stating that those just under the limit are 2-3 times more likely to be in an accident - What statistics and from where show this?

Secondly, would the government row back on the limit if, as I suspect, no reduction in road deaths is achieved by this proposed change? If not, why not?

Edit: Numerous studies have shown that men get a little sleepy after having sex. Accordingly Gardai will be enforcing with the use of lie detectors a "no sex before driving rule". "You have the look of a lad thats just been satisifed sexually. Please stand out of the veehhhicle"
 
So do I. It's extremely irresponsible behaviour trying to second guess how your body will metabolise 1/2, 1 or 2 units of alcohol, depending on if a meal has been consumed or not. I believe in zero tolerance. Too many people have lost their lives.
Click to expand...

there are many more issues that need to be tackled than chasing the guy that has 1 pint and drives. I don't drink and drive anymore as I've said but thats more down to not knowing if I'm over the limit at one pint or not than my concern over how my driving has been impaired. I don't think personally that one pint would make a difference to me. Alot of the argument from ministers seems to be very shaky and tries to rely on 'anything thaty reduces deaths is a good thing'.
 
MrMan said:
'anything thaty reduces deaths is a good thing'.
Click to expand...

Anything that reduces deaths surely IS a good thing?

there may well be many other issues to be addressed but this thread is addressing the subject of alcohol and driving, you have said that YOU dont think that 1 pint makes a difference to you - but I still say that that is a subjective observation and that if you were tested for reaction speeds and judgement impairment objectively you may see different results.
 
Well removing our choice to drink at all would reduce death, remove our choice to drive a vehicle would reduce death, the list goes on. Its a simple statement that is put there because what kind of person wouldn't want to reduce deaths on the road yadda yadda. My point is that there must be more reasonable choices that can be made that will have similiar if not greater impact on the 'carnage' on our roads.

Regarding judgement calls, i know if I drive a long journey with little sleep my reactions will be a lot worse than if I drink 1 pint, but theres no law against being tired (yet)
 
elefantfresh said:
Without enforcement it dosnt matter a toss - i drive every day and have never been stopped for anything except tax/insurance glance and once for supposedly jumping a light. Never been tested or even had a cop stick his head in the window.
Click to expand...

Must agree. Driving 29 years. Never stopped either except at routine tax/ince checks. Have never seen any of these "monday morning" random breath checkpoints either. Don't drink & drive so it doesn't bother me and also very wary of even moderate drinking on a night if likely to be driving in the following morning. But again enforcement of existing laws must be accomplished at a reasonable level before considering any new ones.
 
truthseeker said:
Anything that reduces deaths surely IS a good thing?
Click to expand...

The Donegal Coroner claims that reducing the limit will not reduce deaths and as such is NOT a good thing. He argues that if the State's resources are diverted away from catching drunk drivers towards detecting and prosecuting sober (or soberer) drivers, then the drunks will enjoy a greater chance of getting away with their crimes.
 
I am a not very tall female. I often have driven my car having had one glass of wine or a glass of beer. I do not believe that in doing so I have ever put myself or any other road user at risk.

I believe that my driving is far more affected when I am talking to someone else in the car, if I am tired, if I am stressed(which most of us seem to be) , by getting distracted listening to the radio, the antics of other drivers on the road etc..

I expect the limit will be reduced as it is the PC thing to do but until we have enforcement of speeding limits on roads other than motorways, the rules of the road generally on all roads etc... we will have 300 plus road deaths every year. The reduction will make no difference other than to allow Gay Byrne to stay self satisfied and smug in his job.

I drive a lot from Dublin to the west. I seldom have had a journey without seeing 2/3 examples of dangerous driving..overtaking 5-6 cars coming up to the brow of a hill in heavy rain being my favourite but also overtaking on corners,overtaking to fill that space between the two cars in front( left by me as braking distance) ..you mane it i see it but what I never see are any of these morons being pulled in by gardai because the gardai are not out on the roads, there aren't enough speed cameras etc.. Deal with those and make a difference before reducing the drinks limit.
 
i wonder can noel dempsey just sign it into law or does the dail have to vote on it, if it is a dail vote it could be interesting, would back bench rural TDs support this, all the one off housing that was allowed to be built in the country side, the problems with this are now really showing up, most european countries with 50mg limit don't have a scattered population like we do but an urban one, i think there could be a backlash against this
 
truthseeker said:
As for liking the taste - surely a non alcoholic beer tastes like a beer?
Click to expand...
Obviously you aren't a beer drinker my friend! Either that, or a budweiser drinker If you attempt a comparison between kaliber and Schofferhoffer or Paulaner you will soon know the difference.

shanegl said:
And there are no non-alcoholic alternatives? I don't think so.
Click to expand...
Of course there are alternatives, if you fancy going to the pub and having a coke. But you will find that many older people like to have a Guinness or other brand of stout, and there are no non alcholic alternatives to stout - if it is stout you are after.

Anyways - I don't wish to take the subject off topic here.
 
If your blood alcohol level is above the limit, then your driving will be impaired. You may have had several hours of sleep and feel fine, but that does not mean that your driving will not suffer.
 

Totally agree. Speed and plain bad driving cause more accidents than drink driving. As a Dub recently moved to a rural area I was shocked at the sheer recklessness of local drivers. Crazy overtaking, even in bad conditions, tail-gating, speeding along narrow country roads, taking corners at high speed... I never saw this in Dublin (probably because its so grid-locked traffic can barely move )

The Gardai always seem to be found on major roads or near bus-lanes. I have NEVER seen a garda speed check or roadblock on the narrower, rural roads in the two years since I moved 'to the country'.
 
shnaek said:
Obviously you aren't a beer drinker my friend! Either that, or a budweiser drinker
Click to expand...

Spot on - Im not a beer drinker at all.

If people want to enjoy a particular type of alcohol that there is no non alcoholic version palatable enough for them then can they not have a drink or two at home and not be using the car at all? (this follows the line of reasoning that some people drink because they enjoy the taste and not to get drunk), if they enjoy the taste and want the specific alcoholic drink there is nothing stopping them enjoying it safely and responsibily in the comfort of their own homes?
 
Reducing the limit from 80mg to 50mg will not reduce accidents on the road. What it will do is close the remaining country pubs who are struggling as it is. I live 2 miles from my local pub. Their is no Taxi service or public transport available so I will not be able to have 1 pint and drive home.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register