Drink Driving Limit

Monkey Business

Hey,

I'd often go for a single pint after work and was just wondering would this put me above or below the limit? I know there are loads of different factors but I always thought one was ok.

Random

you should be ago but as you mention "there are loads of different factors". my personal policy is not to do it. if you're drinking don't bring the car and if you have the car drink coke or blackcurrant or water.

mathepac

Monkey Business wrote: »

... but I always thought one was ok.

Why?

Is there information available that says it is OK to drive after one pint?

Even if you are not legally "drunk", your attention span, reaction times, and observational abilities may be impaired, making you a danger to yourself on the road (which I frankly don't care about) or much more importantly, a danger to others.

Nonoperational

Because for an average man that drinks a few pints a week, 1 pint would not put you over the limit.

deman

What is the limit nowadays?

Max Power1

gpf101 wrote: »

Because for an average man that drinks a few pints a week, 1 pint should not put you over the limit.

fyp

theres no way of knowing. With the reduced limit, 1 pint may put you over the limit. I'd never chance it, even for one beer. Its not worth risking a ban and massive insurance loading for years.

When drinking - the car stays firmly at home imo.

Mr Benevolent

80mg/dL blood with a proposal to bring it down to 50mg

deman

So it's still not brought down to 50mg. They've been chatting about bringing it down to 50mg for years. What's the hold up?

djimi

If youre not sure then dont risk it. Its only one pint; I dont think youre going to miss it somehow. You can get personal breathalizer testers in chemists if you want to check.

Mimikyu

This post has been deleted.

Max Power1

Captain Morgan wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

not very i would guess.

It tells me I would be just on the limit after 2 pints (4 drinks in the calculator), i would guess that it would take a lot less to put me over the limit. Even after 1 pint I would think my reaction times etc were altered for the worse.

djimi

Captain Morgan wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Not in the slightest. Its telling me that if I have 3 drinks in a hour Im still just under the limit. If I have three drinks in an hour Ill be stumbling around chatting up the coat stand...

Mr Benevolent

Nah that's not accurate or reliable. For me, 4 drinks over 3 hours would have me fairly drunk, but it's still telling me I'd be under the limit.

Mimikyu

This post has been deleted.

Mimikyu

This post has been deleted.

Yakult

Buy one of those breathalyzers, drink a point and test yourself.
Wouldnt risk it myself but then again I dont drink often so dont push the risk.

djimi

Captain Morgan wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Three glasses of wine would have me in a similar state tbh...

n0brain3r

Got bagged a few weeks ago about 30 mins after I had a large glass of wine I'd say 330mls can't be sure of the alcohol content but was with dinner - not a huge feed. I wasn't expecting to go out but got a call and had to. I'm about 5'11" and about 14/15 stone - I call it stocky! I passed but it took a good 30-45 secs I told the guard I'd had a drink and he said I was lucky the machine usual only takes that long on a failure as it's re analyzing the sample!

CiniO

Monkey Business wrote: »

Hey,

I'd often go for a single pint after work and was just wondering would this put me above or below the limit? I know there are loads of different factors but I always thought one was ok.

Considering a limit is 80 promille of alcohol in the blood a grown man would for 99.9% be under the limit after one pint of beer of max 5% alcohol volume.

CiniO

mathepac wrote: »

Why?

Is there information available that says it is OK to drive after one pint?

Even if you are not legally "drunk", your attention span, reaction times, and observational abilities may be impaired, making you a danger to yourself on the road (which I frankly don't care about) or much more importantly, a danger to others.

Why?
Because that's the law.
By law person below 80mg limit is considered sober.

2yung2adm

Confab wrote: »

Nah that's not accurate or reliable. For me, 4 drinks over 3 hours would have me fairly drunk, but it's still telling me I'd be under the limit.

The drink driving limit(excess alcohol in expired breath) does not indicate the state of drunkenness or otherwise per se. It is statutory Law. If you are over the limit you are over the limit, whatever the state of sobriety. However if you are under the limit and do not show other signs of drunkenness you are ok.
Under the limit and showing signs of intoxication from alcohol or drugs or a combination of both could still result in proceedure under section 49(1) of the road traffic act on the opinion of a Garda.
However both may be intertwined as a Garda who observes driving that gives him cause for concern has to "form an opinion" before he can administer the alcholiser.
In other words a Garda cannot just pounce on you and demand you give a specimen of breath.
There is now one exception to this. The Gardai can set up random checkpoints simply to demand a specimen of breath without forming any opinion. The locations and times of these checkpoints have to be designated by a Garda not below the rank of Inspector and this designation cannot be retrospective.
In otherwords if there is not a prior designation for a random breath test checkpoint any case brought in the absence of a record of the checkpoint designation will fail in a Court.

CiniO

2yung2adm wrote: »

The drink driving limit(excess alcohol in expired breath) does not indicate the state of drunkenness or otherwise per se. It is statutory Law. If you are over the limit you are over the limit, whatever the state of sobriety. However if you are under the limit and do not show other signs of drunkenness you are ok.
Under the limit and showing signs of intoxication from alcohol or drugs or a combination of both could still result in proceedure under section 49(1) of the road traffic act on the opinion of a Garda.
However both may be intertwined as a Garda who observes driving that gives him cause for concern has to "form an opinion" before he can administer the alcholiser.
In other words a Garda cannot just pounce on you and demand you give a specimen of breath.
There is now one exception to this. The Gardai can set up random checkpoints simply to demand a specimen of breath without forming any opinion. The locations and times of these checkpoints have to be designated by a Garda not below the rank of Inspector and this designation cannot be retrospective.
In otherwords if there is not a prior designation for a random breath test checkpoint any case brought in the absence of a record of the checkpoint designation will fail in a Court.

And that shows that law is stupid.
Every garda should be able to brethylise any driver at any time without forming any opinion.

The only time I ever tried driving when fairly tired was a scary experience and I wouldn't do it again. I don't know how there is even debate over the limit - any alcohol is going to slow your reaction time It's not just you, it's a massive hunk of metal!
If you want your pint take the bus...

Treehouse72

All this "can I have 1 pint?" bollox demonstrates why the limit should zero (or, at least, no more than trace amounts of alcohol). Remove all doubt so everyone knows where they stand.

I never have a drop if I know I'm going to drive and I have little respect for the "I only had a glass" brigade. Just don't bloody drink at all!! How frigging hard is that?

unkel

2yung2adm wrote: »

The drink driving limit(excess alcohol in expired breath) does not indicate the state of drunkenness or otherwise per se. It is statutory Law. If you are over the limit you are over the limit, whatever the state of sobriety. However if you are under the limit and do not show other signs of drunkenness you are ok.
Under the limit and showing signs of intoxication from alcohol or drugs or a combination of both could still result in proceedure under section 49(1) of the road traffic act on the opinion of a Garda.
However both may be intertwined as a Garda who observes driving that gives him cause for concern has to "form an opinion" before he can administer the alcholiser.
In other words a Garda cannot just pounce on you and demand you give a specimen of breath.
There is now one exception to this. The Gardai can set up random checkpoints simply to demand a specimen of breath without forming any opinion. The locations and times of these checkpoints have to be designated by a Garda not below the rank of Inspector and this designation cannot be retrospective.
In otherwords if there is not a prior designation for a random breath test checkpoint any case brought in the absence of a record of the checkpoint designation will fail in a Court.

Quoted for truth.

@Captain Morgan - I've had a go at your calculator with a good few inputs and I've found the results to be fairly ok compared to a complex formula I use that a scientific institute came up with a couple of decades ago. The inputs are very restricted though. One just does not drink a 125ml measure of wine at 11% vol alc. Not realistic!

One factor these calculators do not and can not account for is metabolism (because it depends on the person)

Very important to emphasise the point 2yung2adm was hinting at:

Being officially over or under the legal limit is not necessarily the exact same as being unsafe or safe to drive. I really hope people get this point.

sesna

Treehouse72 wrote: »

All this "can I have 1 pint?" bollox demonstrates why the limit should zero (or, at least, no more than trace amounts of alcohol). Remove all doubt so everyone knows where they stand.

I never have a drop if I know I'm going to drive and I have little respect for the "I only had a glass" brigade. Just don't bloody drink at all!! How frigging hard is that?

We should just make the speed limit zero too, then we will have no more road accidents or deaths.

Thoie

According to that calculator I'm currently somewhere around 0.01% BAC (out of a limit of 0.08%), and I can tell you right now that I'm not fit to drive - I'm barely fit to type. I might risk driving right now if the only possible alternative was someone's death, but other than that I don't intend getting behind the wheel for a good 8 hours minimum, 10 preferably.

2yung2adm

CiniO wrote: »

And that shows that law is stupid.
Every garda should be able to brethylise any driver at any time without forming any opinion.

That cannot be so and in the interest of fredom-something we have fought for, for centuries-and democracy those of us who are adhering to democratically applied laws have the right not to be stopped or hassled.
When we loose that right it will be a sad day.
Gardai are agents of the state and have to work within the law and the constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights...thankfully.

2yung2adm

sesna wrote: »

We should just make the speed limit zero too, then we will have no more road accidents or deaths.

That is a very good point.

Perhaps the reaction times of every driver should be assessed each year and a personal speed limit applied to them according to their reactions or lack of reactions and a personal excess alcohol in the breath limit also applied.

It is all very well to say that reaction times are reduced with the consumption of alcohol. But if my reaction time is 10 on a scale of 10 and I have one pint and my reaction time goes down to 9 on the scale, am I more dangerous on the road that joe soap who has a reaction time of 5 on the same scale every time he drives on the public road? food for thought.

mathepac

CiniO wrote: »

Why? ...

Unless you are just in from the pub or are otherwise chemically impaired you'd have noticed that the original question wasn't directed at you.

CiniO wrote: »

... Because that's the law ...

The law in question makes no such determination, check it, unless of course either of the conditions above applies (see Section 49 of the Road Traffic Act 1961 and Section 10 of the Road Traffic Act 1994)

CiniO wrote: »

... By law person below 80mg limit is considered sober.

No they are not. To paraphrase the law, persons over that limit (or the other limits specified in law) are currently considered "to be incapable of having proper control of the vehicle"; the law makes no determination as to their level of sobriety or otherwise.

CiniO

2yung2adm wrote: »

That cannot be so and in the interest of fredom-something we have fought for, for centuries-and democracy those of us who are adhering to democratically applied laws have the right not to be stopped or hassled.
When we loose that right it will be a sad day.
Gardai are agents of the state and have to work within the law and the constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights...thankfully.

That has nothing to do with freedom.
If you decide to drive a car on a public road, you have to be aware, that you can be stopped anytime so gardai can check your license, insurance, tax, nct, roadworthiness of your car, and of course they can check if you are sober. That's at least what I think it should look like.

I don't mind being stooped for few minutes, if I know that because of that kind of actions, someone else will be also stopped, who might have been drunk and let's say if he wasn't stopped he could have crashed into me.

sesna

n0brain3r wrote: »

Got bagged a few weeks ago about 30 mins after I had a large glass of wine I'd say 330mls can't be sure of the alcohol content but was with dinner - not a huge feed. I wasn't expecting to go out but got a call and had to. I'm about 5'11" and about 14/15 stone - I call it stocky! I passed but it took a good 30-45 secs I told the guard I'd had a drink and he said I was lucky the machine usual only takes that long on a failure as it's re analyzing the sample!

Thats very interesting. Even if you had failed on the initial breathylser test though, by the time you went to station etc you may very well have metabolised any excess alcohol to bring you back down below the limit.

Just wondering if that was before the introduction of the new limits? I read somewhere that the current machines the gardai use all need to be recalibrated which will take some time. Not sure if this has been done yet.

Treehouse72

sesna wrote: »

We should just make the speed limit zero too, then we will have no more road accidents or deaths.

Reductio ad absurdum

Mimikyu

This post has been deleted.

sesna

Captain Morgan wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Ah okay, its been passed by the Oireachtas, probably has not been commenced yet. I was away and thought it had been. Think its due to come in soon, in a few weeks. Nice screen name for this discussion by the way.

Mimikyu

This post has been deleted.

2yung2adm

CiniO wrote: »

That has nothing to do with freedom.
If you decide to drive a car on a public road, you have to be aware, that you can be stopped anytime so gardai can check your license, insurance, tax, nct, roadworthiness of your car, and of course they can check if you are sober. That's at least what I think it should look like.

I don't mind being stooped for few minutes, if I know that because of that kind of actions, someone else will be also stopped, who might have been drunk and let's say if he wasn't stopped he could have crashed into me.

Of course it has everything to do with freedom.
Agents of the state are there to work within the constitution and the European Convention on Human rights.
Many countries are still fighting for what we take for granted.
Power to stop will nilly would set a dangerous precedent and this was taken into consideration when the random checkpoint legislation was drafted hence the necessity that they are predetermined and authorised by a rank of Inspector or higher. Failure to show that the checkpoint was so authorised will rightfully lead to failure of any cases brought before our courts.

CiniO

bluewolf wrote: »

If you want your pint take the bus...

Probably you forgot, that in Ireland in many rural places there is no such thing as bus, and for a taxi you might wait for a couple of hours or even you might not get it at all on a weekend night.
What are you suppose to do then?

slimjimmc

Arrange a lift or don't drink. Simple. There's no excuse for going for a drink and driving home, as it's totally avoidable.

CiniO

slimjimmc wrote: »

Arrange a lift or don't drink. Simple. There's no excuse for going for a drink and driving home, as it's totally avoidable.

Of course there is excuse - 80mg limit - so having a pint or possibly two is legal

Beside - as I said - it's avoidable in the cities and towns, not in the rural areas.

slimjimmc

CiniO wrote: »

Of course there is excuse - 80mg limit - so having a pint or possibly two is legal

Beside - as I said - it's avoidable in the cities and towns, not in the rural areas.

What?, you're seriously saying you can't go to a pub without avoiding drinking alcohol

Mimikyu

This post has been deleted.

tommyhaas

slimjimmc wrote: »

Arrange a lift or don't drink. Simple. There's no excuse for going for a drink and driving home, as it's totally avoidable.

You dont need an excuse, its legal. Theres nothing wrong with having a pint after work and driving home, provided you arnt over the limit

slimjimmc

They choose to drink and drive, they could equally have chosen not to so. The rural/urban thing is largely irrelevant because you can still socialise without having to drink (many do) although it might feel odd for a while.

Mimikyu

This post has been deleted.

CiniO

slimjimmc wrote: »

They choose to drink and drive, they could equally have chosen not to so. The rural/urban thing is largely irrelevant because you can still socialise without having to drink (many do) although it might feel odd for a while.

Me F.E. don't go to pub to socialize.
I go to pub to have a pint because i like to have a pint.
Going to pub and not having a pint would be pointless.

And to be honest I am happy that Irish law allows me to do that - have a pint and drive home.
In country that I come from, limit is 20mg, so having a pint and driving is out of discussion. There I couldn't do it, and I didn't do it. I also didn't have to do it, because there was a lots of public transport available.
Here I don't really have a choice, but I don't see anything wrong with it, as it's legal.

Thoie

Captain Morgan wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Because I'd had quite a lot to drink over the space of a 6 + hours, having not had any alcohol for a number of weeks before that, and in combination with tiredness. I was obviously able to type, I just shouldn't have been in charge of a keyboard

Treehouse72

I am sickened by the blasé attitude of some on this topic. "Ah sure, a pint's grand and I can drive the same on it". Such unspeakable, ignorant bollox in my opinion.

Mimikyu

This post has been deleted.

Treehouse72

Captain Morgan wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Because it's about more than whether one is strictly and technically breaking the law or not. It is about consciousness raising and saving people's lives.

Most pubs have machines that measure the amount of alcohol in your system and if your over the limit or not.

Always give that a go before you leave.