Drink Driving Limit?

dceire

What is the legal drink driving limit?

Up to now I didnt drive if I had a drink but going to a freinds party tonight & have to bring a few people home afterwards, would there be any harm in having say a pint?

peckerhead

dceire wrote:

What is the legal drink driving limit?

Always lower than you think! (I speak from sorry experience...:()
The question is probably not so much "how many mg/1000ml", etc. but "will I be safe with one pint?" Depends on your age/sex/weight/what you've had to eat before. I'd be 99% sure that a single pint (of beer!) won't quite put you over the limit, but tbh what's the point? After one pint (at a party with friends) you're definitely going to be tempted to have another! A 14/16-stone male with a full tummy can probably risk two pints, but beyond that you'd be looking for trouble...?

My advice is don't drink at all, and don't get stuck with the "designated driver" thing next time!

dceire

Yea I think I'll probably just stick to my drink dont drive policy, not much point in having just one anyway!

BrianD

The best route to take. In fact the reduction of the blood/alcohol level is long overdue in this country. Then again it's easier for our ministers to call for the introduction of motorway barriers than doing something that will have a real effect in reducing alcohol related road deaths.

leeroybrown

I've never seen the point in having one. If I drive I just don't drink.

We probably do need to bring our max blood alochol level in line with most of Europe (0.05) but I do think that the limits imposed by Sweeden (0.02) is very low and lets not mentions the countries that operate under Moslem law.

That said, I think that the only way that an alcohol level reduction will reduce road deaths is if it magically persuades people not to drink when driving - something that hasn't been drilled into some people's heads yet.

Agent Smith

imo, if you drink and drive, You deserve the punishment....


Dont do it, Stick to coke....

leeroybrown

agent smith wrote:

Stick to coke....

Ironically, I've always found that if I drink coke (or other sugar laced soft drinks) for an extended period of time in a pub the sugar will make me drowsy behind the wheel and affect my driving.

I'd love to see this attitude that 'you can have one' removed from peoples mindset. I've been designated driver on occasions where people start insisting that I have one despite knowing that I was driving. I once turned up to a wedding reception to collect my father and had to sit through people that I didn't even know calling me a 'boring ****' because I wouldn't have one.

cormie

I never drink anyway really.. I'd have more alcohol in dinners (white wine sauce etc) throughout the year then I would any other way but I really can't see the point, for people who do drink, to even bother having one pint.

I thought agent smith was referring to a different kind of Coke.. any limits on drugs or is it just a complete no no?

stevenmu

I'm not too sure the limit really needs reducing, in my mind it's only going to make a difference in that people will be slightly more over the limit than they would have been before. I'm firmly in the don't drink at all if you're going to drive camp.

cormie wrote:

any limits on drugs or is it just a complete no no?

Well, they're all illegal anyways , but wrt to driving, I think it varies from drug to drug aswell as how long ago it was taken, has for eg can remain in your system and will show up on a test months after use, but it's generally accepted that it wouldn't affect your driving after a much shorter time than that.

Seth Brundle

I don't drink & drive nowadays and will always opt for something like Becks NA if available.
However, the thing that really pisses me off is that it is usually more expensive than a comparable bottle of normal beer

alias no.9

BrianD wrote:

The best route to take. In fact the reduction of the blood/alcohol level is long overdue in this country. Then again it's easier for our ministers to call for the introduction of motorway barriers than doing something that will have a real effect in reducing alcohol related road deaths.

TBH, reducing the limit at the moment would be a waste of time since the current limit is not effectively policed or enforced. Random breath testing is what is needed.

Saruman

I think the limit is about a pint... Its not made clear in any ads here though.

You are better off not drinking but if you are eating a small glass of wine or a beer should be grand.
You can always have a shandy, they taste good and dont have as much alcohol as a pint (about half). Plus it looks like you are having a beer (if you care about that sort of image!).

dahamsta

I very, very rarely do it but I have been know to have a single pint. It certainly won't put 99.9% of people over the limit, and anyone that tells you different is a liar. Unless you're emaciated, or haven't eaten for way too long, or are seriously unhealthy in some other respect, it's fine.

I also object to people whining about it, it's absolutely none of their business to whine about an individual acting within the law if they so choose. If they want to whine, they should do so to their TD, about the law itself.

ubu

Does anyone have any info regarding how long after you are pissed its safe to drive? i know it depends totally on the person and the amount of drink taken but i have gone to partys and driven home the next morning and not felt 100%, its only happened once or twice but i was warey doing it but i was in work and it had to be done.

Seth Brundle

ubu wrote:

Does anyone have any info regarding how long after you are pissed its safe to drive? i know it depends totally on the person and the amount of drink taken but i have gone to partys and driven home the next morning and not felt 100%, its only happened once or twice but i was warey doing it but i was in work and it had to be done.

I think you answered your own question.
As everyone is different there is no fixed period for the effects of alcohol to wear off.
However, I remember hearing that about 2 hours per pint is a good average.
If in doubt, then don't drive!

leeroybrown

I think the average person can metabolise between 15mg (+/-3mg) of alcohol per 100ml blood per hour. So that's just over 2 hours a pint.

Seth Brundle

yaay - I was right!

unkel

First of all, best not to drink anything or only very little before driving

Blood alcohol levels depend on many factors, like:

1. amount of alcohol consumed
2. total drinking time
3. gender
4. weight

Other factors are how much the person is used to alcohol and if the person metabolises quicker or slower than average. These factors are generally disregarded in any easy calculation as can be found on the web

According to this calculator a 90kg male can drink 6 pints over a period of 6 hours and still be within the limit. I don't think I'll try though

iregk

I dont really understand why we have a drink driving limit at all. I'm in the boat of if your driving just dont drink so why even allow people a sip? In my opinion i think there shouldn't even be a limit, you drink your over the limit full stop.

Had an argument with a taxi driver the other day, i was saying what i said above and he was saying all young people feel like that but you just dont understand it. Thats the mentality we have to grow out of and we are to be fair. the older generation didn't see the harm and to an extend still sort of dont where as our generation (im 26 btw) just dont get it.

Eoin

unkel wrote:

First of all, best not to drink anything or only very little before driving

Blood alcohol levels depend on many factors, like:

1. amount of alcohol consumed
2. total drinking time
3. gender
4. weight

Other factors are how much the person is used to alcohol and if the person metabolises quicker or slower than average. These factors are generally disregarded in any easy calculation as can be found on the web

According to this calculator a 90kg male can drink 6 pints over a period of 6 hours and still be within the limit. I don't think I'll try though

And don't forget about other factors, that may not be able to be measured, but can still affect how you handle your drink - for instance how tired you are - I would find that a pint on a Friday after work would hit me much harder than two pints on a Saturday night.

unkel

eoin_s wrote:

And don't forget about other factors, that may not be able to be measured, but can still affect how you handle your drink - for instance how tired you are

Absolutely! Those calculators can give some idea, but they should be taken with some very large grains of salt

unkel

iregk wrote:

I dont really understand why we have a drink driving limit at all. I'm in the boat of if your driving just dont drink so why even allow people a sip? In my opinion i think there shouldn't even be a limit, you drink your over the limit full stop

It's not that simple

There can be small but very measurable amounts of alcohol in medication, ice cream, sauces, chocolates and what not. But some countries indeed have very low limits like 0.2 (we have 0.8) which means a pint for most is well over the limit

dahamsta

iregk wrote:

I dont really understand why we have a drink driving limit at all.

You can't set the limit to 0 because other things have alcohol in them, like cough medicine. And you can't remove it, because then the law would have to be enforced on whether you have consumed /drink/ or not, which would create a massive overhead.

[Neah, unkel got there before me.]

adam

iregk

Thats a good point, hadn't even thought of that...

Hotblack Desiato

Until someone can demonstrate that drivers between 50-79mg are a significant safety issue then there is no case for changing the law. All it would achieve would be to criminalise a sector of the driving public who are, by and large, responsible and safe.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Most convicted drink-drivers in Ireland are more than twice over the existing limit. They drink as much as they like and don't give a fig about the 80mg limit, so why should a 50mg limit bother them?

What we do need to do is to enforce the existing law and enforce it rigorously including random checks. If there's no chance of getting caught, then whether the limit is 5mg or 500 is irrelevant.

Seth Brundle

ninja900 wrote:

What we do need to do is to enforce the existing law and enforce it rigorously including random checks. If there's no chance of getting caught, then whether the limit is 5mg or 500 is irrelevant.

There is no point in enforcing the law if the judiciary will just throw a €2k fine and leave it at that!
DD should require mandatory minimum sentencing in order to discourage anyone from doing it.

unkel

ninja900 wrote:

Until someone can demonstrate that drivers between 50-79mg are a significant safety issue

Afaik the risk curve gets a little bit steeper after 50 and before 80 but not until after 80 do the risks get significantly greater very quickly

And I agree with you, random checks will do a lot more for containing drink driving than reducing the limit

Aln_S

I never have anything to drink if i am driving. I also have a long standing argument with a friend about this.

Say you have one pint and you are below the limit. You are on your way home and you have an accident which is a 50/50 senario. The other driver smells alchol on you calls the cops and you have a blood test.
Now when the case goes to court the other guys solicitor rips you to bits because you had some alchol on you. Case closed in my book??

What you think? because i know if the situation was reversed i would deffo try to make a case against the other guy on the basis of it.

My friend says that it cant be brought up in court because you were under the legal limit, and if it does you could appeal??

unkel

Aln_S wrote:

Now when the case goes to court the other guys solicitor rips you to bits because you had some alchol on you. Case closed in my book??

Nope. Your friend is right. You are either over the limit or you are not from a legal point of view

Aln_S

Hmm yeah i guess.
I wouldnt depend on it tho!

Hotblack Desiato

kbannon wrote:

There is no point in enforcing the law if the judiciary will just throw a €2k fine and leave it at that!
DD should require mandatory minimum sentencing in order to discourage anyone from doing it.

What really galls me is that a 12-month ban for DD can be halved by applying to the court. "I really need it for me work judge" Shoulda thought of that beforehand mate.

What I'd call "aggravated" DD (i.e. grossly over the limit, or caught committing another offence McDaid style, or causing an accident while DD) should IMHO always result in a >=2 year ban, mandatory jail time, and mandatory re-test, on top of whatever other sentences would be incurred for the other offences.

But then we'd have to look at all of the other penalties e.g. dangerous driving and especially dangerous driving causing death. A few years ago, a woman (not drunk) convicted of dangerous driving causing the death of a friend of mine was fined £500. Doesn't seem right.