Article: Michael Fitzgerald & Drink Driving

Drax

Mods, feel free to move this if you feel its in the wrong place...

Irish Independent wrote:

FINE Gael has been plunged into an embarrassing controversy after one of its politicians openly admitted he drinks and drives.

Tipperary councillor Michael Fitzgerald (50), who has a previous drink-driving conviction, said he sees nothing wrong with motorists having "three or four pints" before getting behind the wheel.

He insisted such people were being wrongly targeted for the carnage on our roads.

But a "furious" Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny last night effectively expelled councillor Cllr Fitzgerald from the party after hearing the comments.

He is to recommend that the whip be removed, putting him outside the party.

The storm comes just weeks after Fine Gael called for a zero tolerance approach to drink drivers.

A prominent Fine Gael county councillor in South Tipperary, Mr Fitzgerald publicly admitted he drives with "three or four pints" even though he has previously been breathalysed and banned from driving.

Mr Fitzgerald said he only wanted to highlight the issue of young boy racers driving at high speed in souped up cars in the early hours of the morning.

"I've never killed anyone. I feel the wrong people are being targeted," he said.

Lamenting the demise of Irish traditional pub culture, Mr Fitzgerald also hit out at the morning after breath test and said random breath testing is killing off the remnants of rural Ireland.

People were being confined to their homes and could not even drink at home as they could be breath-tested the next morning.

But his party leader reacted with fury when he heard the remarks.

Mr Kenny is to recommend to the party's Executive Council, which deals with disciplinary matters, that the whip be removed from Mr Fitzgerald over his remarks. "Enda Kenny was extremely angry," a party spokesman said last night.

"The law is the law and must be upheld."

The Road Safety Authority slammed his comments as "irresponsible".

Spokesman Brian Farrell said 30 lives have been saved since random testing was introduced and that the vast majority of the public supported the measure.

In an interview with Tipp FM radio, Mr Fitzgerald was asked if he drank and drove. "I do," he replied.

Asked how many drinks he took, he said about three or four pints.

Mr Fitzgerald cited the case of a man he knew who was caught for drink-driving just 100 yards from his house.

"Was he a threat doing what he did all his life?

"You have seasoned drinkers who can take four pints and you would hardly know they had it," said Mr Fitzgerald.

He also admitted being previously put off the road after being caught drink-driving.

In a statement last night, Mr Fitzgerald said: "I am totally opposed to the abuse of alcohol and to driving under the influence of drink, and fully support the gardai in their efforts in this regard.

"I also hold the view that while the law must be upheld across the board, that recent crackdowns by the gardai have been somewhat extreme on the public as they try to engage in normal convivial social behaviour."

Right, so to highlight the issue of boy racers, he admits to drinking and driving, and says its ok to do so. Unreal... Maybe he had a few pints on him when he said that. How can anybody in this country put any faith in our politicians anymore? :rolleyes:

Stephen

What a prick. The sad thing is he will probably get re-elected :rolleyes:

Avns1s

He might get re-elected but it won't be for FG. What a clown!

Seth Brundle

Apparently Tipp Co Co (of which he serves as a councillor) launched some kind of programme yesterday to tackle the carnage on the roads!!!

connundrum

I was just about to post this in After Hours, what a fcukin joke..

If I were a on the Road Safety Council I would personally go down and strangle him. I mean how the hell are we to progress anywhere when there are people like him - in a public position of authority - around, giving everydrink driver the thumbs up.

The councillor, who has a previous conviction for drink-driving, claims motorists under the influence of alcohol are being wrongly targeted for causing the ongoing carnage on Ireland's roads.

Rediculous!! I have a couple of speeding tickets.. so what I'll do is get elected to the local council, and give it loads about the older drivers who are causing all the accidents... sure its not us speeders at all!!

Apparently Enda Kenny is incensed with Fitzgerald's comments, and its considering taking serious action against him. Well I would have thought that he would have been doubly incensed since the first time Fitzgerald said it a while back.

Get rid of him tbh :mad:

layke

Enda shouldn't consider it, he should just do it.

mike65

The mans a fool!

Mr Fitzgerald said he only wanted to highlight the issue of young boy racers driving at high speed in souped up cars in the early hours of the morning.

"I've never killed anyone. I feel the wrong people are being targeted," he said.

Failure to tackle one does'nt make the other any more right. What a prink, the worst sort of old-school country-bumpkin.

Mike.

Henry Ford III

Enda sacked him.

Pherekydes

How can Enda sack him? He can dump him out of the party, but he can't do anything about him sitting on some council.

The guy's a pea-brain, but it'll be surprising how many will vote for him at the next election.

Mojito

Gregor Samsa

Unfortunately, this muppet's attitude is not uncommon. I know a guy who overturned his van into a ditch one night after falling asleep while driving under the influence. Luckily no-one was injured. Afterwards, he was adamant that the drink had nothing to do with the accident. He also feels quite hard done-by that the local Garda warned himself and some of his mates that they were cracking down on drink driving in the area and that he shouldn't expect any favours. The Garda waring has made him reluctantly change his ways, but we'll see how long that lasts

Eoin

A little OT, but:

From the same story here

The chief executive of the Road Safety Authority Noel Brett this morning said Mr Fitzgerald was sending out the wrong message.

"I wouldn't be using whether or not someone has been killed or seriously injured as the bench mark. The reality is drink driving is not acceptable.

"We know from our own market research that 87 per cent of the Irish population actually want more drink driving enforcement."

Does that mean that over 1 in 10 don't want more drink driving enforcement?

Vegeta

This guy is a fool

I hope FG make an example out of him.

Tosser

Stark

Ah sure, don't we all drive better with a bit of Dutch courage

He must have been drunk when he went on radio, the tactless fool. I wonder if his admittance is enough to convict him of a drink driving offence and get him a driving ban.

doubledown

What an absolute twat. To come out with a series of comments like that in this day and age is unbelievable.

He should have his licence taken away!

VERYinterested

I wonder will we ever change the mindset? Along with this fool I have had countless arguments with people complaining at the injustice of Gardai breath testing people in the mornings. But if you are over the limit at night and you have had a skin full, the chances are that you will be over the limit the next morning and just as capable of causing carnage, so why do people feel that it is unjust to be caught the next morning. It's like saying it's ok to be caught speeding at night, but it's not right that you get caught the next moring? Am I missing something?

hawker

Well to be honest I don't agree with these morning check points at all. People are good enough to leave cars at home on a night out and need their cars if they want to get to work the next morning. What if a person is living 20/30/40 miles from work? Are these people not entitled to a few pints on a Sunday night?

I think it's going too far and it's ruining the pub culture in this country.

Gregor Samsa

hawker wrote:

Are these people not entitled to a few pints on a Sunday night?

No one is saying that they're not. It's just that they are also obliged to act responsibly and lawfully the next day. It's up to them to reconcile the two.

hawker

phutyle wrote:

No one is saying that they're not. It's just that they are also obliged to act responsibly and lawfully the next day. It's up to them to reconcile the two.

Yes I agree with you. But how much does a person know how much they can drink the night before?

Stark

"Endangering Irish pub culture". That's a good one.

hawker

Stark wrote:

"Endangering Irish pub culture". That's a good one.

Look before you leap. I actually wrote 'ruining'.

ambro25

hawker wrote:

But how much does a person know how much they can drink the night before?

How much more state-nannying do you want? :rolleyes:

Drink-driving on the night or the morning afterm, just like speeding or double yellow line-parking, is a matter of personal responsibility. Your personal freedom stops where that of others begins, it's up to you to find out.

hawker

ambro25 wrote:

How much more state-nannying do you want? :rolleyes:

Drink-driving on the night or the morning afterm, just like speeding or double yellow line-parking, is a matter of personal responsibility. Your personal freedom stops where that of others begins, it's up to you to find out.

Perhaps you misunderstood.

If I wanted to go out on a Sunday night for a few pints where do I draw the line? Can I have 5 pints and be happy in the knowledge that I could safely pass a random breath test the next morning? Can I have more than that? It seems there is no definitive guide to how long it takes alcohol to leave your system before you are deemed safe to drive. It's impossible to know the morning after a few pints.

ambro25

I didn't misunderstand.

Alcohol absorption and dissipation may vary from one individual to another, but there is a clear difference between a couple of pints and a skinful.

It's whatever does the trick for you, and if it's an issue, just buy a disposable or reusable personal breathalyser, and work out your average.

At the end of the day, it's not down to the State to regulate your drinking to suit your driving requirements, it's down to your own level of personal responsibility - the State's only mission is to try and ensure that there are no drivers DUI on the road.

Driving is not a right, it's a priviledge, so any people concerned would do well to remember time and again that a priviledge is something you act responsibly with and take care of, once you've acquired it.

People need to get to work in the morning, same as they did 100 years ago when there were no cars: they are today priviledged to be able to do so with their own transport means - regardless of whether they need to drive to work, because of geographical imperatives. If they didn't drive in the first place, they wouldn't have gone for the job - so which is more important? The extra pint on Sunday or the job?

I'm trying not to preach, but I've been on the (painful) receiving end -as has my wife- and have precisely zero sympathy (quite a lot of antipathy, actually) for anyone DUI.

Vegeta

hawker wrote:

Perhaps you misunderstood.

If I wanted to go out on a Sunday night for a few pints where do I draw the line? Can I have 5 pints and be happy in the knowledge that I could safely pass a random breath test the next morning? Can I have more than that? It seems there is no definitive guide to how long it takes alcohol to leave your system before you are deemed safe to drive. It's impossible to know the morning after a few pints.

well as a general guideline it takes one hour to process one unit of alcahol. so if you drink 5 pints and finish up at about 12 come 8 o clock in the morning you should be fine

On the other hand if you go to a night club and stay up til 3 am and drink 15 units of alcahol well then common sense would tell you not to drive.

The 1 hour per unit is also only a guideline and probably varies from person to person a bit

You can also buy your own handheld breath testing device.

hawker

Cheers for the general guieline. Just that I usually like 5/6 pints on a Sunday night and I'd be home by 12am. Not away till 8 next morning so it shouldn't really bother me so.

I presume I can quote you if I'm stopped?:)

KTdesigner

What does he mean "Souped up" car? Is that a car full of soup or something?

And if all the young people were banned from driving (or better yet just terminated at birth, or up to the age of say 30, a kind of retro abortion). this would solve everyone's road problems, there'd be no traffic, no speeding, and no government soon after.

I assume the "soup" is THICK COUNTRY VEGETABLE.

Destroy the ones you call Politicians... DO NOT VOTE, they are overpaid and they do nothing. Feck them from a height. hehe.

Vegeta

hawker wrote:

Cheers for the general guieline. Just that I usually like 5/6 pints on a Sunday night and I'd be home by 12am. Not away till 8 next morning so it shouldn't really bother me so.

I presume I can quote you if I'm stopped?:)

if you are over the limit quote away, they will still throw the book at you.

"The 1 hour per unit is also only a guideline and probably varies from person to person a bit"

I didn't type that for fun.

1 hour per unit is a guideline and may not apply to you

hawker

ambro25 wrote:

I didn't misunderstand.

Alcohol absorption and dissipation may vary from one individual to another, but there is a clear difference between a couple of pints and a skinful.

It's whatever does the trick for you, and if it's an issue, just buy a disposable or reusable personal breathalyser, and work out your average.

At the end of the day, it's not down to the State to regulate your drinking to suit your driving requirements, it's down to your own level of personal responsibility - the State's only mission is to try and ensure that there are no drivers DUI on the road.

Driving is not a right, it's a priviledge, so any people concerned would do well to remember time and again that a priviledge is something you act responsibly with and take care of, once you've acquired it.

People need to get to work in the morning, same as they did 100 years ago when there were no cars: they are today priviledged to be able to do so with their own transport means - regardless of whether they need to drive to work, because of geographical imperatives. If they didn't drive in the first place, they wouldn't have gone for the job - so which is more important? The extra pint on Sunday or the job?

I'm trying not to preach, but I've been on the (painful) receiving end -as has my wife- and have precisely zero sympathy (quite a lot of antipathy, actually) for anyone DUI.

I was simply asking a question in order to put my mind at ease if I felt like a few pints during the week.

hawker

Vegeta wrote:

if you are over the limit quote away, they will still throw the book at you.

"The 1 hour per unit is also only a guideline and probably varies from person to person a bit"

I didn't type that for fun.

1 hour per unit is a guideline and may not apply to you

I wasn't serious about quoting you. It was my attempt at humour and if I offended you in any way, I apologise.

Vegeta

hawker wrote:

I wasn't serious about quoting you. It was my attempt at humour and if I offended you in any way, I apologise.

No apology needed, I just wanted to make sure you understand that maybe you are not the average person and alcahol might stay in your system longer

I wouldn't like to have your death on my conscience if you crashed, died and for some strange reason the lady reading the news said "A man has died in a car crash on his way home from the pub, he was known as hawker from boards"

well then i'd feel a bit of guilt for telling you it was 1 unit per hour when obviously it didn't apply to you because you only have half a liver or something.

All I am saying is be careful and the only 100% way to know for sure you are not over the limit is to not drink on Sunday night or have a few non alcaholic Becks or something awful tasting like that.

Its very easy for me to say don't drink and drive when I don't drink myself (I know an Irish 23 year old male who doesn't drink, what a freak!!!)

Stark

Vegeta wrote:

All I am saying is be careful and the only 100% way to know for sure you are not over the limit is to not drink on Sunday night or have a few non alcaholic Becks or something awful tasting like that.

Ah yes, non-alcoholic Becks. By far and above the best way to get a hangover without drinking alcohol.

ambro25

hawker wrote:

I was simply asking a question in order to put my mind at ease if I felt like a few pints during the week.

Noted. Irrelevant, tbh. Put your mind at ease with drinking sensibly and check your own "processing rate".

el tel

hawker wrote:

If I wanted to go out on a Sunday night for a few pints where do I draw the line? Can I have 5 pints and be happy in the knowledge that I could safely pass a random breath test the next morning? Can I have more than that? It seems there is no definitive guide to how long it takes alcohol to leave your system before you are deemed safe to drive. It's impossible to know the morning after a few pints.

The question on one's mind should not be "How much booze can I get away with and still pass the breathalyser test?" but more "To what extent will my driving be impaired?". When it comes to assessing your 'chances', if there is a doubt, then there's no doubt.

oleras

Stark wrote:

I wonder if his admittance is enough to convict him of a drink driving offence and get him a driving ban.

Why should it ? last time i read the law its not an offence to drink and drive....has it changed ?

alias no.9

What a gob****e. I hope he's dismissed from fine gael asap. This other gob****e didn't go so far as to admit drink driving, though he did advocate turning a blind eye to drink driving for rural dwellers in much the same way, but I'd hazard a guess that fianna fail has taken no action.

In fact, it seems they've since elected him Mayor.

Back to Hawker's question, remember when you're counting your units of alcohol, 1 pint = 2 units, a rough guide is that the body metabolises 1 unit per hour but this can be affected by a number of factors such as food, sleep and being still dehydrated from the skinful you had on saturday night.

Guy:Incognito

hawker wrote:

Well to be honest I don't agree with these morning check points at all. People are good enough to leave cars at home on a night out and need their cars if they want to get to work the next morning. What if a person is living 20/30/40 miles from work? Are these people not entitled to a few pints on a Sunday night?

I think it's going too far and it's ruining the pub culture in this country.

Its the same thing. If you go out and have 10 pints at night and are still over the limit in the morning its the same as having one or two for breakfast. If your over the limit your over the limit, just because it was hours ago doesnt mean you arnt over the limit anymore.

NUTLEY BOY

Over the limit = over the limit. QED.

Your responsibility is to make sure that you are on the right side of the limit WHENEVER you take the wheel.

This is real Councillor Larry O'Hooligan stuff that brings back the best days of Halls Pictorial Weekly.

Stiil, you can never beat those Fine Gael councillors for devising challenging approaches to rural life.

Wasn't it some other FG councillor in a different part of the country who once suggested that members of certain families should be microchipped ?? I think that went down just as well at party HQ !

maidhc

Christ. I don't approve of drink driving, I rarely even drink, but all this political correctness is sickening.

Living in rural Ireland, I see the point he is making. There is a far greater margin for error stealing along a country road at 40k (as many of these guys used to do) compared to do 130k on a motorway. The rules DO discriminate against rural dwellers, taxis, car sharing, designated dessies etc are not really options here, and for many the pub and a few beers is the only place to meet a few friends.

Because something is law or otherwise does not mean it is perfect or infallible. Ask a Jew who lived in Europe (including Ireland) in the 1930s.

Personally I don't think there can be any other workable solution other than the one we have. I don't think it should be any stricter, and probably not much more lenient either.

But this stupid hysteria must stop. NOW.

colm_mcm

kinda thing.....

heggie

yet almost all road deaths are in rural areas, another 3 tonight. You know the signs in dublin that say 'xx killed on north/south dublin roads in the past 3 years' south is something like 60, which considering the population is very low.

maidhc

heggie wrote:

yet almost all road deaths are in rural areas, another 3 tonight. You know the signs in dublin that say 'xx killed on north/south dublin roads in the past 3 years' south is something like 60, which considering the population is very low.

In Cork County ALONE there are 7500miles of road. People do far more driving. They are tired, stressed, make mistakes, some indeed are probably drunk, lads from the city come out the act the maggot on the quiet roads. You get all sorts.

And it is hard enough to kill yourself in a city centre car crash (so long as you are not a pedestrian or cyclist!).

Guy:Incognito

maidhc wrote:

In Cork County ALONE there are 7500miles of road. People do far more driving. They are tired, stressed, make mistakes, some indeed are probably drunk, lads from the city come out the act the maggot on the quiet roads. You get all sorts.

And it is hard enough to kill yourself in a city centre car crash (so long as you are not a pedestrian or cyclist!).

All that is exactly the reason why people in rural areas should NOT be allowed to drink and drive aswell.

So if the rule is changed to allow ruural people to drink and drive, is it then not discriminating against people in urban areas by forcing them to pay to get to and from the pub?

maidhc

Stekelly wrote:

So if the rule is changed to allow ruural people to drink and drive, is it then not discriminating against people in urban areas by forcing them to pay to get to and from the pub?

Driving isn't free last time I checked!

This really is a uniquely Irish problem. No where else in Europe do we have such a weird settlement pattern of houses scattered all over the countryside. It is a difficult problem, and there is no easy solution. I don't know if there is a solution.

Being hysterical about a councellor who flagged this as a real issue isn't the way forward though.

AMurphy

The councillor, who has a previous conviction for drink-driving, claims motorists under the influence of alcohol are being wrongly targeted for causing the ongoing carnage on Ireland's roads.

I don't remember reading this in the article. Though there was something about driving after 3~4 pints.

Big difference between 3~4 pints and DUI.

You'd need to have had more than 3~4 or even 5 to still be drunk the next morning.

While foolhearty, he is telling it as it is.

And why is he being singled out and made a scapegoat for his bad example. when your Fearless Leader has no problem buzzing villates at 90mph, or was it much less, eg 75.

As the man said, "The law is the law and must be upheld"...... indeed, that and other fairystories....:rolleyes:

alias no.9

maidhc wrote:

Christ. I don't approve of drink driving, I rarely even drink, but all this political correctness is sickening.

Living in rural Ireland, I see the point he is making. There is a far greater margin for error stealing along a country road at 40k (as many of these guys used to do) compared to do 130k on a motorway. The rules DO discriminate against rural dwellers, taxis, car sharing, designated dessies etc are not really options here, and for many the pub and a few beers is the only place to meet a few friends.

Because something is law or otherwise does not mean it is perfect or infallible. Ask a Jew who lived in Europe (including Ireland) in the 1930s.

Personally I don't think there can be any other workable solution other than the one we have. I don't think it should be any stricter, and probably not much more lenient either.

But this stupid hysteria must stop. NOW.

It's not political correctness, it's peoples lives. Maybe theres an argument for being a little more lenient on blood alcohol levels between 80mg alcohol / 100ml blood and say 100mg alcohol / 100ml blood, if enforcement is increased with more checkpoints and breath tests and those who're quite clearly taking the piss >150mg alcohol / 100ml blood automatically do porridge and get 5 to 10 year driving bans.

What I don't get is why this always comes back to the oh we have to drink and drive, there's no other option. If rural pubs are dying, where's the initative? Have a courtesy bus. One model that I've seen and I think would be great if it were more widespread is a minibus that collects you and brings you to the pub for free, meaning the cars are left at home removing temptation, and then passengers pay the equivalent of the local taxi/hackney fare to be brought home.

oleras

alias no.9 wrote:

Have a courtesy bus.....................

passengers pay the equivalent of the local taxi/hackney fare to be brought home.

Then it would not be a courtesy bus.......

maidhc

alias no.9 wrote:

It's not political correctness, it's peoples lives. Maybe theres an argument for being a little more lenient on blood alcohol levels between 80mg alcohol / 100ml blood and say 100mg alcohol / 100ml blood, if enforcement is increased with more checkpoints and breath tests and those who're quite clearly taking the piss >150mg alcohol / 100ml blood automatically do porridge and get 5 to 10 year driving bans.

Lots of things save lives, and alcohol testing is one of them. However I don't think that silly school boy Enda Kenny will achieve much by a "zero" alcohol/blood limit, nor do I think the FG councilor should automatically be lynched because he went a bit against the grain of middle class feeling in sub/urban Ireland.

Drink driving is an issue of road safety, but only one issue, and probably not the most important one (nowadays anyway). I found it disturbing to hear a garda on the radio saying: "most accidents happen between 1 and 2, that is when people are coming out of pubs, most accidents are caused by drink, qed". But it is also the time when people are tired, are tempted to drive fast, may be on drugs, or, to use a an A-team quote, "on the jazz".

A more graduated penalty system (we have a bit of one already) is a very sensible solution. Perhaps a bit of a carrot wouldn't go amiss either, e.g. subsidised minibus home as you suggest. But then we would have other (shrill) people saying the government was condoning "binge drinking".

alias no.9

maidhc wrote:

Perhaps a bit of a carrot wouldn't go amiss either, e.g. subsidised minibus home as you suggest. But then we would have other (shrill) people saying the government was condoning "binge drinking".

I don't think the government should be subsidising busses to pubs, I think the publicans should. They're the ones crying that their trade is being hurt by the enforcement of drink driving laws, in most industries you need to invest to protect and grow your turnover and profit, why not rural pubs?

Victor

VERYinterested wrote:

But if you are over the limit at night and you have had a skin full, the chances are that you will be over the limit the next morning and just as capable of causing carnage, so why do people feel that it is unjust to be caught the next morning.

And if one gets done in the morning, how bad was one the night before?

hawker wrote:

Well to be honest I don't agree with these morning check points at all. People are good enough to leave cars at home on a night out and need their cars if they want to get to work the next morning. What if a person is living 20/30/40 miles from work? Are these people not entitled to a few pints on a Sunday night?

A few yes, but how did they get home. And a few pints (2-3) generally won't show up the morning after.

I think it's going too far and it's ruining the pub culture in this country.

Is that the pub culture of fights in the chipper afterwards or go home first and beat the wife?

Heraldoffreeent

Look lads,
Accidents happen on country roads beacause the country roads are in a terrible condition, we have more than twice the amount of cars on the roads now than we had 10 years ago, we have more than 200,000 people on the roads with provo licences, 20% of accidents are found to be caused by people with drugs in their system.

There are many causes of accidents, to listen to people on this board you would think nobody in Dublin takes a drop and drives,( by the way I live in dublin, before you call me a culchie) with the amount of high moral ground in some of posts here you could look down on the spire!