New drink driving laws - 3 mth ban no more points

worded

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/cabinet-approves-new-drink-driving-legislation-777105.html

So can you have a pint of Guinness and a meal and a pint of water
Wait 1 hour and you are under ? Or is it 0 alcohol allowed ?

Thanks

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

The penalty will change not what constitutes an offence.

Grandeeod

worded wrote: »

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/cabinet-approves-new-drink-driving-legislation-777105.html

So can you have a pint of Guinness and a meal and a pint of water
Wait 1 hour and you are under ? Or is it 0 alcohol allowed ?

Thanks

Over the limit means automatic ban. I reckon its only a matter of time before any alcohol in the system will mean a prosecution.

ABC101

Remember it's a ban for being over a legal limit, not necessarily being drunk behind the wheel.

If the limit is reduced further, more drivers will fail the blood Alcohol test / breath test. The RSA would then complain at the number of drivers failing the test and demand that the limit be reduced further, which would mean more drivers fail the test and son on and on and on.

The RSA will never understand that the harder a test is to pass, the higher the failure rate.

Self driving cars need to come quick before the entire population gets banned.

allthedoyles

With Garda discretion been taken away , there be no leeway on this one . Good time to invest in recovery vehicles , I presume if you over limit you cannot drive any further .

I hate the 8am checkpoints , think its lousy .

sdanseo

allthedoyles wrote: »

With Garda discretion been taken away , there be no leeway on this one . Good time to invest in recovery vehicles , I presume if you over limit you cannot drive any further .

I hate the 8am checkpoints , think its lousy .

You could just not drink and drive, then you'd have nothing to be worried about.

drunkmonkey

When it says 3mts off the road, I presume that's not until your convicted or is it straight away, I'd assume you can challenge it?

drunkmonkey

sdanseo wrote: »

You could just not drink and drive, then you'd have nothing to be worried about.

Or just do it in the rain or between shifts.

worded

How soon will self driving cars become a reality ?

Grandeeod

drunkmonkey wrote: »

When it says 3mts off the road, I presume that's not until your convicted or is it straight away, I'd assume you can challenge it?

Yep. That would be upon conviction. Usual laws still apply.

drunkmonkey

worded wrote: »

How soon will self driving cars become a reality ?

A long long way away, there will always need to be a coheriant pilot as a spare

When does Ireland get a public transport system to be proud of?

worded

I can and do havie a single pint (pref guinness midnstrengh)
Pint of water chaser
Wait one - two hour and drive once / twice a mth mid week

It's such a lovely great treat

Would be sad to see that go

Live too far from pubs to walk and taxi too expensive to justify

diomed

There is a bit of an obsession with drink driving. Is it just because it is easy to detect? I'm for bans but there should be some sense shown when the result is marginal. I would like big bans for multiple offences.
How many accidents are caused by driving on drugs (prescription or other), or driving when sleep deprived.

NIMAN

Although this change would not really worry me personally, I do not understand the idea of people trying to calculate if they can have 1 pint and still be ok.

Are do really need that pint? Can you not have a meal without a drink?
Many times when I have been out, I forego the single pint or glass of wine, as it would make me want another!

I don't understand trying to push it for the sake of your licence, maybe your livelihood, for the taste of one drink.

drunkmonkey

Some people don't give a feck especially pensioners.

worded

NIMAN wrote: »

Although this change would not really worry me personally, I do not understand the idea of people trying to calculate if they can have 1 pint and still be ok.

Are do really need that pint? Can you not have a meal without a drink?
Many times when I have been out, I forego the single pint or glass of wine, as it would make me want another!

I don't understand trying to push it for the sake of your licence, maybe your livelihood, for the taste of one drink.

I drink very little but I don't want
To have no life

I can have 1 pint and
Stop

99% of the time
I eat with no alcohol

DrumSteve

worded wrote: »

I drink very little but I don't want
To have no life

I can have 1 pint and
Stop

99% of the time
I eat with no alcohol

I feel like that's a riddle

NIMAN

worded wrote: »

I drink very little but I don't want
To have no life

I can have 1 pint and
Stop

99% of the time
I eat with no alcohol

To equate not drinking = no life is a little OTT.

I never said don't have a drink, but I think anyone who does it when they have the car with them is plain stupid. Many think "sure I'm ok to have one pint", but why even bother? Why take the risk?

If you can take 1 pint and stop, then do you really need that one pint.

Atlantic Dawn

Hopefully there's a public record of everyone done for drink driving, there was talk of this coming in too, name and shame will be good deterrent too.

ABC101

NIMAN wrote: »

Although this change would not really worry me personally, I do not understand the idea of people trying to calculate if they can have 1 pint and still be ok.

Are do really need that pint? Can you not have a meal without a drink?
Many times when I have been out, I forego the single pint or glass of wine, as it would make me want another!

I don't understand trying to push it for the sake of your licence, maybe your livelihood, for the taste of one drink.

It's not a case of needing that one pint.

It's a case of loosing ones job/ livelihood / career because you had ONE pint / glass of wine.

Such is the puritanical state Ireland is turning into.

BunkMoreland

Is there really much harm in having a few drinks and driving? I mean really? It's not as if you're going to drive straight into the wall or anything. If you're langered then yeah not a good idea but after 2 or 3? I've never done it but I've completed much more complicated tasks than driving after a few.

jimmycrackcorm

sdanseo wrote:

You could just not drink and drive, then you'd have nothing to be worried about.

I'd happily agree with you if you can tell me exactly how long I need to wait until I can drive.

Tigger

the new limit is stupid low
there is no evidence that people at the low level have accidents

most of the high alcohol deaths are suscides so the incorrect reporting is skewing the results

however drinking and driving is stupid so i'm sorta glad this is the result, driving is complicated and people should be more responsaible

Tigger

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I'd happily agree with you if you can tell me exactly how long I need to wait until I can drive.

you burn off about half a unit an hour
so if you drink 6 pints in 5 hours from 7-12
you have ingested 12 units
so you are clea (carrying 0 units) by 7 pm the next day

what do you weigh so i can tell you how many units you can carry to be under the new limit

wotzgoingon

I was breathalysed one time and I hadn't drank in about two weeks guard asked me when I had a drink and I told him and he said you were drinking tonight as my level was up. I said I wasn't and he didn't believe me. Going by that I wouldn't want to even drink one pint and then drive as I would probably register as after drinking a few pints.

Tigger

wotzgoingon wrote: »

I was breathalysed one time and I hadn't drank in about two weeks guard asked me when I had a drink and I told him and he said you were drinking tonight as my level was up. I said I wasn't and he didn't believe me. Going by that I wouldn't want to even drink one pint and then drive as I would probably register as after drinking a few pints.

were you on a diet?
the keytones that you bfreath out in a fat burning state can confuse a breath tester

wotzgoingon

Tigger wrote: »

were you on a diet?
the keytones that you bfreath out in a fat burning state can confuse a breath tester

No but I am on medication so maybe that effected the reading.

Mongfinder General

wotzgoingon wrote: »

I was breathalysed one time and I hadn't drank in about two weeks guard asked me when I had a drink and I told him and he said you were drinking tonight as my level was up. I said I wasn't and he didn't believe me. Going by that I wouldn't want to even drink one pint and then drive as I would probably register as after drinking a few pints.

You must be serious ale tank for that to happen. 2 weeks is some stretch.

wotzgoingon

Mongfinder General wrote: »

You must be serious ale tank for that to happen. 2 weeks is some stretch.

Often done it. Depends on my mood. Sometimes I fancy a few pints or cans of Smithwicks other times I could go with out.

Tigger

wotzgoingon wrote: »

No but I am on medication so maybe that effected the reading.

Mongfinder General wrote: »

You must be serious ale tank for that to happen. 2 weeks is some stretch.

certain meds could affect the breath results but if you havent have a drink simply explaing your case and request a blood test

eeguy

ABC101 wrote: »

It's not a case of needing that one pint.

It's a case of loosing ones job/ livelihood / career because you had ONE pint / glass of wine.

Such is the puritanical state Ireland is turning into.

ONE pint / glass of wine AND making a conscious decision to break the law. Just because you feel like you'll be grand to drive is no excuse to break the law.

BunkMoreland wrote: »

Is there really much harm in having a few drinks and driving? I mean really? It's not as if you're going to drive straight into the wall or anything. If you're langered then yeah not a good idea but after 2 or 3? I've never done it but I've completed much more complicated tasks than driving after a few.

It's nowt to do with complexity. It's to do with attentiveness and reaction times, which are lower after a drink.

Tigger

eeguy wrote: »

ONE pint / glass of wine AND making a conscious decision to break the law. Just because you feel like you'll be grand to drive is no excuse to break the law.

well the law should matter upon whether ou were impaired
but asuming they have done their research and you are right they are impaired then i agree
the 2006 limit was me a 17 stone man allowed to drive after 5 pints
i always thought i was a bit to pissed after 5 pints to drive

there is an irish culture thing and a there is no real public transport thing to discuss but i rember neinf a lab manager and wondering if the staff didnt realise i knew thew were pissed coming in

Sam Quentin

Surely we all know at this stage and with all the research available etc etc that even just one drink can alter your train of thought, thinking, reflexes etc etc...... So what is the issue people seem to be having with these new laws? I actually thought that the 3 Month ban was from immediate effect after they drag you out of the car and knock some sense into you :mad: and then you wait for your court appearance to get a further 2 or 3 year ban.........

Tigger

Sam Quentin wrote: »

Surely we all know at this stage and with all the research available etc etc that even just one drink can alter your train of thought, thinking, reflexes etc etc...... So what is the issue people seem to be having with these new laws? I actually thought that the 3 Month ban was from immediate effect after they drag you out of the car and knock some sense into you :mad: and then you wait for your court appearance to get a further 2 or 3 year ban.........

its a culture think
change is hard

TGJD

wotzgoingon wrote: »

I was breathalysed one time and I hadn't drank in about two weeks guard asked me when I had a drink and I told him and he said you were drinking tonight as my level was up. I said I wasn't and he didn't believe me. Going by that I wouldn't want to even drink one pint and then drive as I would probably register as after drinking a few pints.

Smoking a short time before breath testing can cause a falsely elevated reading as the test picks up, as I recall, acetone from the smoke.

NIMAN

ABC101 wrote: »

It's not a case of needing that one pint.

It's a case of loosing ones job/ livelihood / career because you had ONE pint / glass of wine.

Such is the puritanical state Ireland is turning into.

Thats my point exactly.

It may be draconian to you, but if that the law and the risks, then why take the chance? You'd be mad to.

TGJD

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I'd happily agree with you if you can tell me exactly how long I need to wait until I can drive.

A healthy liver processes a unit an hr. But you need to digest the drink first. So a pint of guiness which is approx 2.2 units would mean under a zero tolerance policy you couldn't drive for 3 hrs and 12 mins if assuming an hr for the guineas to pass through the stomach and small intestine.

Wowbagger

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Hopefully there's a public record of everyone done for drink driving, there was talk of this coming in too, name and shame will be good deterrent too.

I'm not sure about the naming/shaming, it's like a badge to some. I know one person that has 4 convictions and still chances it from time to time.

SeanW

Sam Quentin wrote: »

Surely we all know at this stage and with all the research available etc etc that even just one drink can alter your train of thought, thinking, reflexes etc etc...... So what is the issue people seem to be having with these new laws? I actually thought that the 3 Month ban was from immediate effect after they drag you out of the car and knock some sense into you :mad: and then you wait for your court appearance to get a further 2 or 3 year ban.........

Perhaps in theory, your reflexes CAN be altered etc, but the decision to drop the limits from 80mg to 50 was not backed by any history of people between those levels causing accidents. When you see a fatal accident in the news involving drink, the driver was usually twice or three times the limit, not between 50 and 80.

The same is true of the new laws on drug-driving. A zero-limit for THC is not backed by any credible science that I am aware of. I know of no research that indicates that cannabis is so corrosive to ones driving abilities that you have to stay off the road for up to one month after having indulged to prevent the resulting intoxication from making a driver more likely to cause an accident.

I'm not defending anyone who drives genuinely impaired - I just want restrictions to be based on evidence. I.E. hard evidence that - for example - people driving with 51mg / L of alcohol have a history of causing alcohol related crashes. Or that people who indulge in weed regularly kill people due to "intoxication" two weeks earlier.

Atlantic Dawn

Wowbagger wrote: »

I'm not sure about the naming/shaming, it's like a badge to some. I know one person that has 4 convictions and still chances it from time to time.

The scummers will continue to do it but those with any sense of community or good name would be deterred if they were named and shamed.

dodderangler

I've noticed in past year more and more people are driving home from local pub. In my estate it's huge. But no one wants t walk home at night so they drive. Even lads who own businesses or lads using company vehicles are driving home with them. For most it's a 45 second drive home as pub is in middle of the estate but them 45 seconds could cost ya your licence and job because Garda are getting wide to it and are always around the estate at night. But only on weekends and no one drives from pub on weekends. But during the week everyone seems to drive home. It's not worth it. Even if it is only 45 second drive.

ED E

Tigger wrote: »

well the law should matter upon whether ou were impaired

You can be impaired and still be ok (if not a learner etc).

Drink Driving Limits and Changes

What are the existing legal limits?

The legal limits for fully licenced drivers in Category B are:

50 milligrammes (mg) of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood (0.05)
67 milligrammes (mg) of alcohol per 100 millilitres of urine or
22 microgrammes of alcohol per 100 millilitres of breath
The legal limits for professional, learner and novice drivers are:

20 milligrammes of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood (0.02)
27 milligrammes of alcohol per 100 millilitres of urine or
9 microgrammes of alcohol per 100 millilitres of breath

Impairment starts ~ .03 so a "zero tolerance" policy would mean 0.2 for regular drivers and 0.00 for novices and those who drive for work.

Graces7

ABC101 wrote: »

Remember it's a ban for being over a legal limit, not necessarily being drunk behind the wheel.

If the limit is reduced further, more drivers will fail the blood Alcohol test / breath test. The RSA would then complain at the number of drivers failing the test and demand that the limit be reduced further, which would mean more drivers fail the test and son on and on and on.

The RSA will never understand that the harder a test is to pass, the higher the failure rate.

Self driving cars need to come quick before the entire population gets banned.

Wondering how you think that will happen? We do not all drink.

Graces7

drunkmonkey wrote: »

A long long way away, there will always need to be a coheriant pilot as a spare

When does Ireland get a public transport system to be proud of?[/QUOTE]

You mean that goes down every back lane in the country? That is impracticable.

darkpagandeath

Can someone explain to me why the likes of the USA drink diving is just a misdemeanour and only a felony after the 3rd. Europe tends to ban and convict on first offence. I think Drink driving is scummy btw.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Graces7 wrote: »

Wondering how you think that will happen? We do not all drink.

He wasn't being literal.

Ok, then 'until the entire drinking population is banned'

If you're driving, don't drink. If you're drinking, don't drive. It's really that simple.
The limit was lowered to stop the whole "but I only had one, I can't be over the limit" bull****.

sbsquarepants

sdanseo wrote: »

You could just not drink and drive, then you'd have nothing to be worried about.

I think we're already at the point where the limit is so low it's skewing the statistics. The RSA get to say 50% or whatever of accidents involved "drunk drivers", something must be done, but in reality they didn't. It's an easy bogey man to point to with out having to face up to much harder problems to fix.
Drivers may have strayed over a very low threshold, but in a lot of cases it wouldn't have made a blind bit of difference. Speeding, poor roads and phones, I would guess are a much bigger cause of accidents, coupled with just good old fashioned bad drivers (it's a learned skill after all, some people are just not very good at it) - then in some of these cases the drivers also happen to be slightly over the limit.

The sort of shít head who's going to drive after 10 pints is still going to drive after 10 pints whether the limit is half a pint or 9 and a half pints.

sbsquarepants

dodderangler wrote: »

. Even if it is only 45 second drive.

What sort of lazy bastard drives for 45 seconds?:mad:

Don't Chute!

One fella saying we live in a puritanical country another fella saying if he doesn't have one drink he has no life! When are people in this country going to cop on and realise that drinking and driving just does not mix? At all.

Discodog

The hardcore of drink drivers will now say that, as they can banned for a pint, they might as well have 6.

I would impose 6 points & a fine on those within say 15% of the limit. But I would impose a 5 year ban on anyone that's double the limit.

There is supposed to be a new focus on catching drink drivers & yet the majority of checkpoints here are during the day.