New drink driving laws - 3 mth ban no more points

Tigger · 15-02-2017 11:53AM

ED E wrote: »

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

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.

that graph seems to be an anti alcohol organisation construct, not the issue of alcohol and driving but the issue of alcohol fullstop

Dohnjoe · 15-02-2017 11:56AM

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.

Not sure if this is a joke or..

It's about killing other people by having impaired reaction times. Drink alcohol, you become impaired. Hence the limit.

lamb stew · 15-02-2017 12:02PM

Firstly I am against drink driving. However I worry how this is going to be enforced. How about food sauces deserts mouthwashes etc. I think for this reason that a total zero limit is not practicle. Its coming to the stage where every motorist who even takes an occasional drop should invest in a breathalyser. Theres so many things that contain alcohol that they must involve lee way. But automatic ban....... Will people be able to prove the breathalyser wrong

Tigger · 15-02-2017 12:02PM

emeldc wrote: »

I think he's doubled up on his figures. It's more like 1 unit p/h, not a half unit p/h.

http://www.drinkfox.com/information/alcohol-metabolism

its more complicated than you think
what i can say is that 0.08 is approx two hours before 0.05 so if you were safe to drive under the old limit of 0.08 yo now need two more hours of not drinking to reach 0.05

Tigger · 15-02-2017 12:06PM

emeldc wrote: »

Where are you getting those figures from. 4 hours to burn off 1 single pint. I had 3 pints last night. By your reckoning I'm still pi$$ed.

no by my reconing you have a bac of 0.01 which is still not 0 (at the time you posted)
at 7.30 you would have had in or around the 0.05 limit in your sytem

its why i think the limit is too low btw

15-02-2017 12:09PM

lamb stew wrote: »

Firstly I am against drink driving. However I worry how this is going to be enforced. How about food sauces deserts mouthwashes etc. I think for this reason that a total zero limit is not practicle. Its coming to the stage where every motorist who even takes an occasional drop should invest in a breathalyser. Theres so many things that contain alcohol that they must involve lee way. But automatic ban....... Will people be able to prove the breathalyser wrong

Those things won't cause a fail. Same reason why the level isn't set to 0.00 as some geniuses call for.

Sonics2k · 15-02-2017 12:10PM

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.

I've had several friends die over the years as a result of drunk drivers. Each one of those absolute bastards said something like "Sure I've only had one or two drinks" and they effectively murdered my friends.

IMO drink driving should get you in jail for 3 months.

Tigger · 15-02-2017 12:13PM

Sonics2k wrote: »

I've had several friends die over the years as a result of drunk drivers. Each one of those absolute bastards said something like "Sure I've only had one or two drinks" and they effectively murdered my friends.

IMO drink driving should get you in jail for 3 months.

several?
like 4 or more, seems very high

BorneTobyWilde · 15-02-2017 12:14PM

Maybe there is a market for a small slower electric vehicle that seats two, that goes 25 KPH. Could be used in rural areas for people who want to go to pub, allow a much higher limit for that. The kinda car that if it hits you, you lean down and scratch your leg and go OW !

elefant · 15-02-2017 12:16PM

This thread strongly suggests to me that pretty much nobody can calculate with certainty how long one needs to wait before being legally ready to drive safely.

Would it be an idea for the State to sell breathalysers that can be used once-off to determine this? Is it, perhaps, already a thing just just isn't very widespread?

Losing your license for three months because you didn't wait an extra half-an-hour before driving in the early afternoon would be very tough.

osarusan · 15-02-2017 12:20PM

elefant wrote: »

Would it be an idea for the State to sell breathalysers that can be used once-off to determine this? Is it, perhaps, already a thing just just isn't very widespread?

You can already buy them from private businesses.

Not a good idea for the state to do it anyway, as they wouldn't have any legal weight compared to their own official police tests.

elefant · 15-02-2017 12:25PM

osarusan wrote: »

You can already buy them from private businesses.

Not a good idea for the state to do it anyway, as they wouldn't have any legal weight compared to their own official police tests.

I was thinking along the lines of allowing the public purchase the exact same model of testing that the Gardai use, so they can have at least a certain degree of certainty about the results.

Delacent · 15-02-2017 12:26PM

Current system is reasonable and there's no reason to change except for Mouthpiece Ross' requirement to be seen to be doing something in the transport area.

50mg limit allows for a pint or one glass of wine.

Here's the current system

"A driver who is not treated as a "specified driver" and who is found to be between 50mg and 80mg will be arrested and brought to a Garda station in the normal way, where an evidential breath test will be carried out.

If confirmed to be over the limit, the driver will be given a fixed charge notice of €200 and three penalty points. This only applies to a driver between 50mg & 80mg and can only applied once in a three year period. A second 50mg-80mg offence is brought ot court.

Any driver who gives a blood-alcohol concentration reading of 80mg-100mg will be given a fixed charge notice of €400 and be disqualified from driving for six months.

Motorists who test above 100mg will face an automatic court appearance, where they will receive a minimum ban from driving of 12 months.

Any motorist who cannot produce a licence within 10 days of their arrest will be treated as a specified driver to whom the 20mg limit applies."

Tigger · 15-02-2017 12:27PM

elefant wrote: »

This thread strongly suggests to me that pretty much nobody can calculate with certainty how long one needs to wait before being legally ready to drive safely.

Would it be an idea for the State to sell breathalysers that can be used once-off to determine this? Is it, perhaps, already a thing just just isn't very widespread?

Losing your license for three months because you didn't wait an extra half-an-hour before driving in the early afternoon would be very tough.

i'm an Analytical Chemist and i'm aware of how to estimate blood alcohol levels
but to be sure i've owned a breathyliser since 2004 (not the same one different ones over the years)
the reason being that i wanted to be sure
i once drank pints from 8pm till 3am maybe 10 pints 22 units and then slept for 12 hours so thats 19 hours and some people think thats 19 units leaving 5 in my system which back then for someone of my size would be under the limit
well i wasn'y under the limit for another 6 hours

with the 0.05 limit i wouldntbe under till 11pm the next night

now 10 pints is a lot and you shouldn't be driving the next day
but lots of people have a feed aof drink at a wedding and then drive the next day

i had believed tht the 3 points at 0.05 for first timers was enough to wake people up but three month ban will ruin them

Tigger · 15-02-2017 12:27PM

Delacent wrote: »

Current system is reasonable and there's no reason to change except for Mouthpiece Ross' requirement to be seen to be doing something in the transport area.

50mg limit allows for a pint or one glass of wine.

Here's the current system

"A driver who is not treated as a "specified driver" and who is found to be between 50mg and 80mg will be arrested and brought to a Garda station in the normal way, where an evidential breath test will be carried out.

If confirmed to be over the limit, the driver will be given a fixed charge notice of €200 and three penalty points. This only applies to a driver between 50mg & 80mg and can only applied once in a three year period. A second 50mg-80mg offence is brought ot court.

Any driver who gives a blood-alcohol concentration reading of 80mg-100mg will be given a fixed charge notice of €400 and be disqualified from driving for six months.

Motorists who test above 100mg will face an automatic court appearance, where they will receive a minimum ban from driving of 12 months.

Any motorist who cannot produce a licence within 10 days of their arrest will be treated as a specified driver to whom the 20mg limit applies."

yeah the current system is fine

osarusan · 15-02-2017 12:28PM

elefant wrote: »

I was thinking along the lines of allowing the public purchase the exact same model of testing that the Gardai use, so they can have a certain degree of certainty about the results.

I think the problem would be that somebody does their own test and it says they're ok, then they get stopped by Gardai and they're over the limit.

The Gardai result would be the only one that would count, but people would be pretty upset with what had happened.

Whatever about the public getting their hands on the same model, I don't think the state should have any role in selling them when it would possibly conflict with their own police tests.

Tigger · 15-02-2017 12:32PM

osarusan wrote: »

I think the problem would be that somebody does their own test and it says they're ok, then they get stopped by Gardai and they're over the limit.

The Gardai result would be the only one that would count, but people would be pretty upset with what had happened.

I don't think the state should have any role in selling them when it would possibly conflict with their own police tests.

if you test anywhere close to the limit you should wait an hour
breath alcohol is acually quite variable, for example hyperventilation before being tested significantly reduces the result

http://chemistry.about.com/b/2013/11/15/can-you-beat-a-breathalyzer-test.htm

elefant · 15-02-2017 12:35PM

osarusan wrote: »

I think the problem would be that somebody does their own test and it says they're ok, then they get stopped by Gardai and they're over the limit.

The Gardai result would be the only one that would count, but people would be pretty upset with what had happened.

Whatever about the public getting their hands on the same model, I don't think the state should have any role in selling them when it would possibly conflict with their own police tests.

Fair enough. I could imagine that happening fairly regularly alright! I wonder is there any way at all for the State to encourage the use of breathalysers then without something like you're describing unfolding?

It's a tricky situation where someone might feel very sure they are under the limit, a breathalyser tells them they are, and they still end up losing their license (and all that can go with that). With all the best will in the world you can still end up branded as a drink driver.

As Tigger said above, even an analytical chemist can misjudge whether they are under the limit. And I don't think very many people driving the day after a session are whipping out breathalysers to be sure right now.

emeldc · 15-02-2017 12:37PM

Tigger wrote: »

http://www.drinkfox.com/information/alcohol-metabolism

its more complicated than you think
what i can say is that 0.08 is approx two hours before 0.05 so if you were safe to drive under the old limit of 0.08 yo now need two more hours of not drinking to reach 0.05

Ok let's discuss. I want to try and understand this

I used the BAC calculator in the link.
12 standard drinks (6 pints Approx i assume)
Male
5 hours drinking time 7-12
13st 7lbs weight.

The results:

Estimated BAC level: 0.193
This would take roughly 12.1 hours to exit your system

12.1 hours. Is that not 1 unit per hour?
What they don't tell you is if it's 12 hours from when you start drinking or when you stop drinking. I'm of the opinion that you are burning alcohol all the time so when you stop you have already burned approx 5 units over your 5 hour drinking time.
You're right though, it's confusing.

Tigger · 15-02-2017 12:41PM

emeldc wrote: »

Ok let's discuss. I want to try and understand this

I used the BAC calculator in the link.
12 standard drinks (6 pints Approx i assume)
Male
5 hours drinking time 7-12
13st 7lbs weight.

The results:

12.1 hours. Is that not 1 unit per hour?
What they don't tell you is if it's 12 hours from when you start drinking or when you stop drinking. I'm of the opinion that you are burning alcohol all the time so when you stop you have already burned approx 5 units over your 5 hour drinking time.
You're right though, it's confusing.

your bac only falls after you stop drinking but your right you are metabolising alcohol all the time less than a unit at the start a unit in the middle and less than a unit at the end

if you chnged the drinking time to 1 hour you'd get a higher bac which would take longer to drop

osarusan · 15-02-2017 12:41PM

elefant wrote: »

Fair enough. I could imagine that happening fairly regularly alright! I wonder is there any way at all for the State to encourage the use of breathalysers then without something like you're describing unfolding?

I think they can encourage them alright. You can already buy single-use breathalysers in Halfords for €2.50, and other places I'd imagine. A 'breathalyser-lite' (whatever that is) costs about €50. Perhaps some kind of joint campaign with the RSA?

The whole thing would just need a massive disclaimer about what legal weight they would (not) carry.

Joe Exotic · 15-02-2017 12:52PM

osarusan wrote: »

I think they can encourage them alright. You can already buy single-use breathalysers in Halfords for €2.50, and other places I'd imagine. A 'breathalyser-lite' (whatever that is) costs about €50. Perhaps some kind of joint campaign with the RSA?

The whole thing would just need a massive disclaimer about what legal weight they would (not) carry.

Just bought this at the weekend after a scare (Wasnt sure was i over the limit the morning after - i wasn't but i nearly sh@t myself:eek:)

Its not a legal test but at least it gives me an indication, and peace of mind.

Its easy to use and you can set the limits to different countries etc.

ABC101 · 15-02-2017 02:07PM

eeguy wrote: »

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.

You need to understand the distinction between breaking the law and being unsafe to drive.
Draconian laws will only lead to more hardship for the population.
Alcohol is not the only stimulant on the central nervous system.   Caffine also affects the human body, sugar levels etc.
Should we also test for these other stimulants as well?
If the UK limit is 0.08 and you are deemed safe to drive at 0.07, In Ireland you would break the law at 0.06.    Yet you could still be technically safe to drive at 0.07.
Posters on this thread clearly don't understand the difference between breaking a law, and being unsafe to drive.   Some posters think they are one and the same.

Allinall · 15-02-2017 02:10PM

Willa Unkempt Bandage wrote: »

He wasn't being literal.

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

Not all people that drink are drivers, and not all people that drive, drink.

That leaves us with " until those that drink and drive are banned".

Doesn't sound half as dramatic now.

PabloAndRoy · 15-02-2017 05:33PM

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 don't like this idea at all .. I don't drink and drive, but why do this?.

Someone makes a mistake, then they get punished (ban, fine etc). Hopefully they learn their lesson and change their habits for the better.

I can imagine Insurance companies and employers scraping this database and keeping track of who got caught years ago, still paying through the nose on insurance etc. Someone could make one mistake at 18 years old and be punished for life. No thanks.

Take your punishment, learn your lesson, be better!

Parchment · 15-02-2017 05:36PM

I cannot understand how people argue with any sort of limit on alcohol for drivers. If you're driving DO NOT DRINK.

If you cant skip the one drink - maybe consider your relationship with alcohol.

Parchment · 15-02-2017 05:38PM

PabloAndRoy wrote: »

I don't like this idea at all .. I don't drink and drive, but why do this?.

Someone makes a mistake, then they get punished (ban, fine etc). Hopefully they learn their lesson and change their habits for the better.

I can imagine Insurance companies and employers scraping this database and keeping track of who got caught years ago, still paying through the nose on insurance etc. Someone could make one mistake at 18 years old and be punished for life. No thanks.

Take your punishment, learn your lesson, be better!

You're a selfish a$$hole if you drink and drive - the world should know how little regard these people have for others.

PabloAndRoy · 15-02-2017 05:47PM

Parchment wrote: »

You're a selfish a$$hole if you drink and drive - the world should know how little regard these people have for others.

Now I remember why I don't post in After Hours any more.

ABC101 · 15-02-2017 06:19PM

I don't agree with public naming and shaming.

Anybody who does is oblivious to what is going on within the senior ranks of AGS at the moment.

If it is deemed safe enough to drive up to 0.08 in the U.K. Then how would you feel about getting busted at 0.06 in Ireland.

And then getting publicaly named and shamed, possibly destroying your relationship with others, damaging future career prospects and possibly encouraging the pogrom mob to burn down your home, all because you broke a very low limit.

But medically and technically you were still safe to drive!!

The Garda Black propaganda dept would have a field day against anybody they did not like.

"Oh sorry it was a accidental cut and paste, you were never done for drink driving, we should never have published you name"

Too late.

smelly sock · 15-02-2017 06:27PM

diomed wrote: »

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.

I'd agree here. Yes it easy to detect as are other driving offences like no tax.

It helps the cops massage their appalling crime figures I think.

No word of a lie here. Report a burglary of theft and you'll be told to contact the insurance and make a statement at the station as they are to busy to go down to you.

To busy because they are all standing on checkpoints collecting revenue.

ANPR is there for a reason and should be used on traffic cameras as well as flash for cash vans.

New drink driving laws - 3 mth ban no more points

Comments