EASTWOOD141 Posted December 2, 2012 Author Share Posted December 2, 2012 There is no excuse for DD, there are plenty of ways to get home after having a good drink, buses, taxi's, ringing a member of the family ect, surely these ways are safer, cheaper, and you still have your license which is an ordeal obtaining, by that I mean I knew a person who took several test to pass, then later in the same year got banned for DD, I know before anyone says the obvious, well he got his license back didn't he! The point I'm making is I would think to myself if I was in his position, my license took some getting and I'm not going to risk losing it over the choice of having a few drinks and I'm certainly not going to take a chance of killing someone with my car which hence turns into a lethal weapon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resident Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 I'm in favour but at the same time the punishments need to be harsher. Minimum sentence should be no lower than 28 days in the nick, followed by 10 YEAR ban (extended to life-time if caught driving whilst disqual) & extended retest before licence is returned at the end of the ban. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERDREAM Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 I’m in favour of a zero tolerance, but set at a trace level to allow any natural occurrence if that can happen. (Presumably there are experts that can set a definitive level. But the trace level must be below what could occur with a single drink. I don’t think that the level should be set in any way that lets medicines off the hook. If the medicine contains alcohol in enough of a quantity to cause a problem, then they shouldn’t be driving whilst they are taking the medicine. This should apply to all medicines, not just those containing alcohol. If a medicine causes drowsiness, or a side effect may impair driving ability in some other way, then the bottle should include a clear “do not drive” instruction. Also, whoever prescribes or sells the medicine should be required to instruct the recipient not to drive. Ideally, I would like to see stronger enforcement, ie temporary withdrawal of licence, inform insurance Co etc, but i can’t see that happening, as the logistics may be a problem. Not often do I agree with you ES, but on this occassion you are bang on the money. Im sure alcohol has different effects on different people, so to eliminate this, zero tolerance is a perfect solution. As to medicines, then let this be included too. You can feel dizzy if you have too much Covonia, yet you are legally entitled to drive after drinking half a bottle for your bad chest! Bring on zero tolerance, best thing ive heard for a long time (except for llamatromps hissy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xmoonshinex Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 If you go out for a drink don't take the car,dd should be in jail on their first offense then jail and banned for life for second offense, Zero alcohol limit cant work,if you have a glass of wine with your Sunday dinner you will show a trace of alcohol if pulled the next day if you are working days.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LilShell Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 good idea..............if I am driving I dont even have one alcholic drink im sure a trace of alcohol is acceptable, you might have inhaled a few alcohol fumes whilst in the pub from peoples breath, a bit like passive smoking passive drinking...sure! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missymoo73 Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 passive drinking...sure! She was joking hun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 I'm in favour but at the same time the punishments need to be harsher. Minimum sentence should be no lower than 28 days in the nick, followed by 10 YEAR ban (extended to life-time if caught driving whilst disqual) & extended retest before licence is returned at the end of the ban. So what punishment do you prescribe for anyone actually causing an accident while sober..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamf Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Yes, the vast bulk of crashes happen with the driver(s) involved at below the legal limit. Isn't that because society has (to some extent at least) made drunk driving socially unacceptable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big_g Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Certain foods, whilst not containing alcohol - can turn into alcohol in the stomach. Excess yeast in bread can react with sugar to produce alcohol. Not to a massive extent but enough to give a reading. I'm sure that there are many more food stuffs that will give an alcohol reading. Severely reduce the current limit but if you say that it has to be zero, people could mistakenly get themselves over the limit. What is the solution then? Do we say that it is zero tolerance? If we do, people may just go out with the attitude that if there is a chance that they'll get 'done' for eating, they may as well have a drink or two or six. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geared Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 passive drinking...sure! Where do you stand on people who've used abit of Listerine before leaving home?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.