Anyone been done for drink driving?

LegacyUser

Yesterday my boyfriend got pulled up for drink driving, he had 3 pints and the breathaliser obviously went red and read in at 90mg and he spent the night in the cells...he has court in a few weeks. What should he expect to get?

We are in the UK btw.

dudara

Not a PI. Moved to Motors.

Apologies to the Motors mods if not the best home.

dudara

Owen

Well, it depends. There's little information in your post. You say you're in the UK, does that mean your BF is British with a UK License? Or Irish, with an Irish License on holiday?

If he's British, then it's a ban I'd imagine, a fine, and a retest. If it's an Irish license, they may just give him a fine, and a ban from driving in the UK for a period of time.

Either which way, there's no point in asking for advice on a forum, as we're all experts. The only real expert is your solicitor.

Wossack

as I guest, I'd say its pretty unlikely she's gonna find this thread again anyway

Gary ITR

Silly boy. For the sake of 3 pints.

As Ned78 said, best person to ask is a solicitor

Turner

90mg per 100millilitres of breath??

That is very high, are you sure he didnt have 13 pints?? The limit here is 35mg

omb0wyn5ehpij9

Chief--- wrote: »

90mg per 100millilitres of breath??

That is very high, are you sure he didnt have 13 pints?? The limit here is 35mg

Was about to post the same thing.....

Owen

Maybe it was 3 pints of Vodka?

djtechnics1210

Or 3 pints of surgical spirits

DaMonk

I get a bit confused by this. I thought a half pint was roughly the limit, depending on the person and things. And the limit is 35mg. Does that not mean that a half pint, or one unit, is equal to 35mg? and that 90mg is roughly a pint and a half.

My mate got done for 37mg the next day at 1 o'clock after staying in a hotel after a party. I have to disagree with that kind of catching people.

djtechnics1210

What's there to disagree about.... he was still over the limit.

DaMonk

djtechnics1210 wrote: »

What's there to disagree about.... he was still over the limit.

Well i think there's a massive difference in doing the right thing by staying in a hotel and having a 7hours sleep, eating breakfast and driving home than driving from the pub home and getting caught.

And I would argue the 'over the limit, then over the limit, regardless of the circumstances' case but I just think its hard done by on the extreme. The process of breathalysing is to get people to do the right thing and catch those acting in a dangerous manner. He was punished for doing the right thing. 9 in the morning, fair enough. But between 12-1 and 2mg over?

Turner

No i dont think it works that way.

The highest ive seen where somebody had given a sample of blood where the limit is 80mg per 100ml of blood was about 350mg/100ml. Now that person did not have 4 or 5 pints. They had about 2 litres of vodka.

Balfa

DaMonk wrote: »

My mate got done for 37mg the next day at 1 o'clock after staying in a hotel after a party. I have to disagree with that kind of catching people.

Why? Do you have anything to suggest that having 37mg/100ml the next day at 1 o'clock has any less effect on your ability to drive than having 37mg/100ml with the glass still in your hand?

DaMonk

Balfa wrote: »

Why? Do you have anything to suggest that having 37mg/100ml the next day at 1 o'clock has any less effect on your ability to drive than having 37mg/100ml with the glass still in your hand?

The limit is 35mg which is deemed perfectly save to drive at. He was pretty much at the limit that is deemed save to drive at. He was doing the correct thing by waiting and driving the next day. What is achieved by catching him like this? they're punishing somebody for having the right thought with regard to drink driving.

And I dont have journal evidence or whatever, but I think most would agree that there's a difference when you've had a sleep and then gotten up than going straight into the car.

bugsntinas

the easy solutions is don't drink and drive.plenty of buses,taxi's or friendsout there.can't do the time don't do the crime.over the limit is over the limit there has to be a line drawn somewhere.

CharlieCroker

I've seen statistics somewhere that the majority of accidents on a sat and sun morning include at least 1 driver who was over the limit.
Also, bare in mind that the intoxilizer takes off 17.5% from its reading to give the final result so the amount in his system was nearly 1/5th higher.
The highest that i've seen on breath is 181mg/100

seanybiker

i got caught a few months back. Blood result was 188 whatevers per whatever. I was a bold boy. Wouldnt mind that night i didnt have that much on me at all compared to other times i didnt get caught. Was a right kick in the arse for me. Havent done it since and wont do it again.
/sits back and waits for the people on high horses to tell me stuff i already know.

Thoie

seanybiker wrote: »

/sits back and waits for the people on high horses to tell me stuff i already know.

The earth is round.
Golf balls have at least 330 dimples.
You could kill a horse with that amount of drink.
The sun is technically green.

Balfa

DaMonk wrote: »

The limit is 35mg which is deemed perfectly save to drive at. He was pretty much at the limit that is deemed save to drive at. He was doing the correct thing by waiting and driving the next day. What is achieved by catching him like this? they're punishing somebody for having the right thought with regard to drink driving.

Alright, I'm not discussing how close to the limit he was, or what the limit should be...

And I dont have journal evidence or whatever, but I think most would agree that there's a difference when you've had a sleep and then gotten up than going straight into the car.

We're not talking about the difference between 6 (or however many, it's not really important) pints and a few hours of sleep vs 6 pints and no sleep. We're talking about the difference between 6 pints and sleep vs half a pint and straight out the door into the car. I don't think I'd really feel impaired either way, so I don't really see there being much difference.

seanybiker

Thoie wrote: »

The earth is round.
Golf balls have at least 330 dimples.
You could kill a horse with that amount of drink.
The sun is technically green.

green sun? Never seen the sun and i live in the sunny south east. I think its a myth

CharlieCroker

seanybiker wrote: »

Blood result was 188 whatevers per whatever.

Legal blood limit is 80 milligrammes of alcohol per 100 ml of blood. That means you were nearly 2.5 times the limit.

Not gonna preach to you, seen plenty of people make the same mistake and a lot of the time its the only time they've had a run in with the law.
It's people who've been caught more than once that wrecks my head.

djtechnics1210

DaMonk wrote: »

The limit is 35mg which is deemed perfectly save to drive at. He was pretty much at the limit that is deemed save to drive at. He was doing the correct thing by waiting and driving the next day. What is achieved by catching him like this? they're punishing somebody for having the right thought with regard to drink driving.

And I dont have journal evidence or whatever, but I think most would agree that there's a difference when you've had a sleep and then gotten up than going straight into the car.

His driving was still impaired and he wasn't fit to drive ......

I'm not gonna argue with ya...... iv put too many people in black bags that were killed from the "i was barely over the limit" and i only had "a few pints" brigade.... its never the drink driver thats end up in the black bag though.

Cant stand people that defend people that are caught drink driving. :mad:
If in doubt don't drive, a bus fare or taxi fare won't break the bank................ hell of a lot cheaper than a solicitor/barrister

Fluffybums

Whilst I'm against a totally zero limit (I think there was a case of someone on antibiotics eating chocolate and, due to the changes in the person's gut bacteria, alcohol appeared on the breath). It would save a lot of confusion if the limit was reduced to a level close to zero, say 5-10 mg/100ml. In this situation, we would all know that the only safe thing to do is not to drink and drive.
For the people caught the next day; as a rule of thumb approximately 1 unit is metabolised in an 1 hour and each subsequent unit takes a little longer (15 min rings a bell). To be still over the limit, however slightly, after 7 hours sleep, the person must have had a skin full so not only is that person still under the influence, they are also hung over with all the problems associated with that. The symptoms of a hang over, in the presence or absence of alcohol, are not condusive to safe driving, as I'm sure anyone who has driven with a hang over can testify (not proud of myself but I have done that).:o

wordofmouth

bugsntinas wrote: »

the easy solutions is don't drink and drive.plenty of buses,taxi's or friendsout there.can't do the time don't do the crime.over the limit is over the limit there has to be a line drawn somewhere.

Thread over.

Bagging the following day is a disgrace imo and I think most people feel the same. Its just not practical to not be able to drive until the next evening. People have things to do and places to go and getting busses or taxi's is not a solution if you have a number of places to go, people to drop off collect etc especially if you live in the country.

We managed fine before this rule so I dont see why they had to introduce it. Obviously driving home from the pub is a different story and I dont condone this but people appear to forget that it was perfectly acceptable up until very recently. I'm not very old and I can remember everybody driving home from the pub after a feed of pints and pub stops were mandatory when on trips to dublin etc now obviously this is out of the question now but the next day should be left alone I cannot remember the morning ever being a time with a high accident rate.

I stress i am not condoning drink driving in anyway but in my opinion after a sleep and food etc the effect of the drink is minimal.

Wossack

so, there should be a window of immunity in the morning?

and folks who work night shifts can d'n'd at 'regular' evening times?

daveharnett

DaMonk wrote: »

The limit is 35mg which is deemed perfectly save to drive at. He was pretty much at the limit that is deemed save to drive at.

It is not remotely safe to drive at the legal alcohol limit, or anywhere near it. Any amount of alcohol increases the dangers involved in driving.

Below 35 means that you get away with it, not that you are "deemed perfectly safe"!

Fluffybums

nox - how do you know you are not still under the influence? Since the limit is set, whatever time you are breathalysed day or night if you over that level you have broken the law! If someone drinks a skinfull, is still 10 mg/100ml over the limit in the morning and gets stopped is that okay? At what level is it okay and why is being over the limit in the morning so different to being over the limit at night?

Barname

pishedoff wrote: »

What should he expect to get?

We are in the UK btw.

I think they use lethal injection in the UK, or, is it hanging? I am open to correction.

Fluffybums

Fluffybums wrote: »

nox - how do you know you are not still under the influence? Since the limit is set, whatever time you are breathalysed day or night if you over that level you have broken the law! If someone drinks a skinfull, is still 10 mg/100ml over the limit in the morning and gets stopped is that okay? At what level is it okay and why is being over the limit in the morning so different to being over the limit at night?

I think there should be some discretion i.e not random breath testing. If someone is stopped at a checkpoint and answers what ever questions he is asked and looks ok, just a lad on his way to work he should be left alone. Obviously if someone is hammered in the morning that would be a different story.

There is a big difference between the morning and straight after a pub imo. You have slept so would not be as tired, have eaten, drank water, had a shower and would be much more settled and thinking straight compared to a person who would drive home from the pub at night

DaMonk

Wren Limited Stepchild wrote: »

I think there should be some discretion i.e not random breath testing. If someone is stopped at a checkpoint and answers what ever questions he is asked and looks ok, just a lad on his way to work he should be left alone. Obviously if someone is hammered in the morning that would be a different story.

There is a big difference between the morning and straight after a pub imo. You have slept so would not be as tired, have eaten, drank water, had a shower and would be much more settled and thinking straight compared to a person who would drive home from the pub at night

I agree with this. Getting caught at 8 in the morning though is somebody's own fault.around 11 or 12 is hard luck depending on when you finish of course.
And to be perfectly honest, I have never driven while having any drink on me and have been bagged 4 times. Your asking the difference between the morning and night. The fact that its daylight in the morning also means your more alert and can see more.Going home at night your tired.

shawnee

Pity the Gardai stopped using "Common Sense" in regards to these situations. Then again common sense is not so common anymore.:D

seanybiker

CharlieCroker wrote: »

Legal blood limit is 80 milligrammes of alcohol per 100 ml of blood. That means you were nearly 2.5 times the limit.

Not gonna preach to you, seen plenty of people make the same mistake and a lot of the time its the only time they've had a run in with the law.
It's people who've been caught more than once that wrecks my head.

yeah thats me only ever run in with them in me 26 years. Well apart from them taking me drink off me when i was younger. Bloody hell tis all drink with me ha ha.

Mr. Presentable

Wren Limited Stepchild wrote: »

I think there should be some discretion i.e not random breath testing. If someone is stopped at a checkpoint and answers what ever questions he is asked and looks ok, just a lad on his way to work he should be left alone. Obviously if someone is hammered in the morning that would be a different story.

There is a big difference between the morning and straight after a pub imo. You have slept so would not be as tired, have eaten, drank water, had a shower and would be much more settled and thinking straight compared to a person who would drive home from the pub at night

I'm sorry, but if I have enough alcohol to be over the limit at noon, are you saying that if I tell the Garda my last drink was the previous evening I should be absolved?

Zube

Wren Limited Stepchild wrote: »

We managed fine before this rule so I dont see why they had to introduce it. Obviously driving home from the pub is a different story and I dont condone this but people appear to forget that it was perfectly acceptable up until very recently.

Exactly. Driving drunk used to be acceptable, now it's not. Driving over the limit next day used to be acceptable, and some people still haven't got the message, but they soon will.

Except for the hard core, who haven't stopped driving while drunk. I don't think checkpoints on the way to work are a bad thing, but I do wish they'd concentrate on the "driving 10 mates home from the club after 15 rum'n'cokes" crowd first. In the same way, I don't think they should bother lowering the limit to 10 mg until the crowd who now drive around at 100 are all deterred.

nipplenuts

nipplenuts wrote: »

I'm sorry, but if I have enough alcohol to be over the limit at noon, are you saying that if I tell the Garda my last drink was the previous evening I should be absolved?

My point is that they shouldn't be doing random breath testing in the morning in the first place. If someone is obviously not in a fit state to drive fair enough take him aside but there is no need to be pestering normal people on their way to work because they might be a bit over the limit after a few pints the night before.

There is so much talk about people taking sick days due to being hungover but people who get up on time and go to work are being shot in the foot, thats no incentive for people to always be at work.

If morning random breath testing was going on a few years ago when I was in the middle of college I basically couldn't have worked(and would have had no money) on Fridays or some Saturdays as we would be on on a session every Thursday night and an odd Friday night and I had to drive 15 miles to work and then drive vans or tractors at work first thing the next morning. The same could be said for most of my friends.

Zube

Julien Tinkling Playwright wrote: »

If morning random breath testing was going on a few years ago when I was in the middle of college I basically couldn't have worked(and would have had no money) on Fridays or some Saturdays.

"Oh, I'm a good boy, I never drove home from the pub, I just drove above the limit once or twice a week. No fair catching me!"

Zube

Zube wrote: »

"Oh, I'm a good boy, I never drove home from the pub, I just drove above the limit once or twice a week. No fair catching me!"

I didn't say I would have been over the limit more that there was a chance at times of being around the limit. Dont be getting on high horse now, I dont know anybody who would have blinked an eye at driving to work after a night out 3 or 4 years ago and to be honest I still think general public opinion would be against morning breath testing as people still have to get to work after nights out.

Squirrel

Julien Tinkling Playwright wrote: »

but there is no need to be pestering normal people on their way to work because they might be a bit over the limit after a few pints the night before.

Try saying that when a loved one is killed by one of the normal people on their way to work a bit over the limit after a few pints the night beofre

Squirrel

Squirrel wrote: »

Try saying that when a loved one is killed by one of the normal people on their way to work a bit over the limit after a few pints the night beofre

I dont really want to get into an argument over this as it is a terrible thing for a family to lose someone on the road but I wonder if there is statistics which show the time of the day serious accidents were caused by drivers over the limit. I think the numbers between say 9am and 1pm would be tiny and most would be caused between 11pm and 5am.

Stephen

Jesus, how much are you drinking the night before to still be at risk of being over the limit the following day?

Stephen

Stephen wrote: »

Jesus, how much are you drinking the night before to still be at risk of being over the limit the following day?

If what the people who are supposed to know what they are talking about are right it does not take an awful amount of drink to be over the limit the next morning.

Pedro K

Stephen wrote: »

Jesus, how much are you drinking the night before to still be at risk of being over the limit the following day?

I have a breathalyser in the house for exactly this sort of situation, and trust me, you would be surprised how often you would come up over the limit despite feeling as fresh as a daisy..

deadwood

Arjun Quaint Question wrote: »

There is so much talk about people taking sick days due to being hungover but people who get up on time and go to work are being shot in the foot, thats no incentive for people to always be at work.

If morning random breath testing was going on a few years ago when I was in the middle of college I basically couldn't have worked(and would have had no money) on Fridays or some Saturdays as we would be on on a session every Thursday night and an odd Friday night and I had to drive 15 miles to work and then drive vans or tractors at work first thing the next morning.

The phrase is "shooting yourself in the foot" which is more appropriate for anyone who drinks enough on a night out to put themselves over the limit the next morning and get behind the wheel - especially heavy machinery!

Sure, a few solpadene will help the hangover and set you right. Nothing like a bit of codeine and alcohol to sort out the shakes for the commute, is there?



Is it compulsory to go out on the session? We still have an attitude in this country that to introduce, never mind enforce, drink driving law to its fullest, somehow infringes on our basic human right as Irishmen to go out and get wasted and that any person that tries to do something to prevent the consequences is seen as being part of a nanny state interfering with civil liberties.

Hundreds of people are killed each year and thousands that we never hear about receive, what we euphamistically call, "life-changing injuries" through drink driving (drink and/or speed and/or innappropriate roads - it boils down to the same thing) but we defend our "right " to have "the three or four, sure i've been doing it all my life".

If I went down to the pub with my shotgun every other night, popped it up on the bar and had my fill before walking home again with it, I bet i'd get some quare looks and no right thinking publican or friend would let me do it. Throw a bunch of keys up there and the biggest concern will be that I might get caught - not that i'd be putting other innocent lives at risk.

i'm not singling you out, but we have to realise that there's NO safe limit. 35µg is a limit and a high one at that, not a target. To have a significant amount of alcohol in your system and to claim to drive safely is a bit like claiming to being a bit pregnant or kind of dead.

deadwood

deadwood wrote: »

Sure, a few solpadene will help the hangover and set you right. Nothing like a bit of codeine and alcohol to sort out the shakes for the commute, is there?



Is it compulsory to go out on the session? We still have an attitude in this country that to introduce, never mind enforce, drink driving law to its fullest, somehow infringes on our basic human right as Irishmen to go out and get wasted and that any person that tries to do something to prevent the consequences is seen as being part of a nanny state interfering with civil liberties.

Hundreds of people are killed each year and thousands that we never hear about receive, what we euphamistically call, "life-changing injuries" through drink driving (drink and/or speed and/or innappropriate roads - it boils down to the same thing) but we defend our "right " to have "the three or four, sure i've been doing it all my life".

If I went down to the pub with my shotgun every other night, popped it up on the bar and had my fill before walking home again with it, I bet i'd get some quare looks and no right thinking publican or friend would let me do it. Throw a bunch of keys up there and the biggest concern will be that I might get caught - not that i'd be putting other innocent lives at risk.

Nox001, i'm not singling you out, but we have to realise that there's NO safe limit. 35µg is a limit and a high one at that, not a target. To have a significant amount of alcohol in your system and to claim to drive safely is a bit like claiming to being a bit pregnant or kind of dead.

I agree with most of what your saying, drink driving is a major cause of death and injury on the roads in this country. Maybe people are taking me up wrong but I am not saying people who are visibly drunk in the morning at 6 or 7am after a night out should be ignored. I am talking about people who are driving after 9 and the only way you could tell they are over the limit is by testing them. I really dont think these people are a danger on the roads.

I also think a lot of people have the idea in their heads that people drive home from the pub after 3 or 4 pints. People still drive home completely locked and I know of people(older generation) who still do. I have heard the " I burst a tyre last Sunday but I was so locked I don't know what I hit" story only last week from some lad in the local. In my opinion this is on a completely different scale to someone who is awake and alert in the morning but maybe in or around the drink driving limit.

As I said I agree with you and most people in this thread on almost every aspect of drink driving and I never drive before 11 or 12 anymore after a night out as the chance of getting caught is too high.

Whitewater-AGS

Wren Limited Stepchild wrote: »

I agree with most of what your saying, drink driving is a major cause of death and injury on the roads in this country. Maybe people are taking me up wrong but I am not saying people who are visibly drunk in the morning at 6 or 7am after a night out should be ignored. I am talking about people who are driving after 9 and the only way you could tell they are over the limit is by testing them. I really dont think these people are a danger on the roads.

I also think a lot of people have the idea in their heads that people drive home from the pub after 3 or 4 pints. People still drive home completely locked and I know of people(older generation) who still do. I have heard the " I burst a tyre last Sunday but I was so locked I don't know what I hit" story only last week from some lad in the local. In my opinion this is on a completely different scale to someone who is awake and alert in the morning but maybe in or around the drink driving limit.

As I said I agree with you and most people in this thread on almost every aspect of drink driving and I never drive before 11 or 12 anymore after a night out as the chance of getting caught is too high.

That just shows ignorance and a lack of knowledge on your part. If a person if over the limit even by 1microgramme they are a danger just cause they can keep their car in a straight line does not mean they are fit to drive.

PaddyofNine

Yeah, that's bull. Just because you can keep your car between the lines and not attract attention from the cops doesn't mean you aren't a danger to yourself and more importantly everyone else on the road in terms of reaction time.

Statistics about accident rates at different times of the day are bull too. If you're over the limit, you're over the limit, no matter if you're going to work or driving your sick granny to the hospital. If you know you have to drive to work in the morning, drink less the night before. It's not rocket science.

deadwood

Wren Limited Stepchild wrote: »

I am talking about people who are driving after 9 and the only way you could tell they are over the limit is by testing them. I really dont think these people are a danger on the roads.

There'll be a lot of people jumping off high horses to give you an earfull about this one!

You make a fair enough point and you're not giving the old "what harm is the old farmer with 3 pints on board" guff.

Unfortunately a lot of people in this position find out they're over the limit when they cause a collision the next morning.

We tend to discuss these things as if the relevant law is blindly obeyed. The amount of people caught speeding, driving dangerously or drunk is only skimming the surface. I have little sympathy for people who are caught- no matter how close to the limit they are. You took the chance and lost. How many times have you got away with it without consequences? (not you, Wren Limited Stepchild)

And O.P. Every drunk driver I have encountered has had three pints. There must be something wrong with our drink driving machine yokeybus.

OldmanMondeo

Just read this thread, lads, if you over the limit your are over the limit end off.
Doesn't matter if you have just walked out of the pub or gotten out of bed. If your unsure then don't drive. As stated the cost of bus fare, taxi fare for 1 trip is better than arranging alternative transport for the next year or so, the new insurance premium you will receive. Never mind the fact that you may / may not kill someone.

Capt'n Midnight

DaMonk wrote: »

The limit is 35mg which is deemed perfectly save to drive at.

No it's the upper limit of acceptable risk in UK / Ireland where a lot of politicians are publicans and tax on alcohol a major revenue source. AFAIK our Blood alcohol level is the highest in the world. In some places in Europe the limits for drivers of heavier vehicles is only a fraction of this.

He was doing the correct thing by waiting and driving the next day. What is achieved by catching him like this? they're punishing somebody for having the right thought with regard to drink driving.

Yes he was doing the right thing , just not for long enough.

Falling asleep doesn't magically wipe the slate clean as anyone who has experianced the morning afterwards knows