nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Drink driving-virtue signaling gone mad

Bobtheman

I realise we have to have laws on this but to be honest I wonder if the checkpoints in the morning should be done way with ? Or perhaps less checkpoints overall?

I honestly think its ok to drive a short distance (1-3 miles) with 3 pints. There I said it . We allow people to drink heavily which is always a health risk but seem hell bent on persecuting people with a few pints? Im talking about rural areas.

No I dont drive drunk. Never have.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Bob Harris

I'm amazed the Dunne hasn't posted here yet.

Wailin

"Virtue signalling".....Christ, what have we become. That and "faux outrage" .....two phrases that boils the blood.

Elemonator

This is insane.

3 pints affects everyone differently. I've seen lads down three pints and not a breeze on them. I've seen others drink 3 and get sick. Only a few short years ago, a girl I knew was out socialising with friends. Got offered a lift home with a man on a few pints. The journey was 3km. On that straight road, he drove into a wall and killed her instantly.

The tolerance for drink driving should be no pints. If you cannot socialise without alcohol, that's your problem.

Steve

Emiliano Many Cardinal wrote: »

Sometime yes, sometimes I listen to live radio not available here or change what I’m listening to along the way, feel like something different in Spotify etc etc. I also reply to WhatsApp messages etc using CarPlay or dictating to my Apple Watch and generally use data quite a lot while driving. It would be a massive inconvenience for me but look it’s never ever going to happen so not worth worry about.

I'm sure (and let's hope it never comes to this) that a judge would not agree that your 'convenience' was a mitigating factor in an accident that - perhaps- caused the deaths of a school bus full of children, because you were momentarily distracted by loading a spotify feed.

[Deleted User]

Bigmac1euro wrote: »

I wonder will driving bans rocket now because of the lower limit automatically making most people over the limit the morning after. It would be quite embarrassing to get done for drink driving and possibly losing your job because you're over the limit by .01

That's a good reason not to go drinking on a night before you'll be driving then.

Emiliano Many Cardinal wrote: »

Sometime yes, sometimes I listen to live radio not available here or change what I’m listening to along the way, feel like something different in Spotify etc etc. I also reply to WhatsApp messages etc using CarPlay or dictating to my Apple Watch and generally use data quite a lot while driving. It would be a massive inconvenience for me but look it’s never ever going to happen so not worth worry about.

While all entirely legal once you're not actually touching or holding the phone, it has to distract you from safe driving if you're dictating text messages or anything else while driving.

Sac O Spuds

There are people who drink and drive. They take the chance. The Gardai checkpoints aren't a regular sight at night. In 24 yrs of driving I've encountered less than 10 late night checkpoints.
What's more the Gardai were cranking up the drink drive arrest figures when in actual fact they weren't setting up the checkpoints.

lawred2

Bobtheman wrote: »

I realise we have to have laws on this but to be honest I wonder if the checkpoints in the morning should be done way with ? Or perhaps less checkpoints overall?

I honestly think its ok to drive a short distance (1-3 miles) with 3 pints. There I said it . We allow people to drink heavily which is always a health risk but seem hell bent on persecuting people with a few pints? Im talking about rural areas.

No I dont drive drunk. Never have.

I think you're wrong personally but even if I didn't; how would allowing people with three pints driving between 1-3 miles as a law work?

Where's the virtue signaling by the way?

Do you see anti drink driving as a right on cause for SJWs or something?

mzungu

Emiliano Many Cardinal wrote: »

What about streaming music, podcast, radio stations and books or using sat nav? Then passengers etc. also with CarPlay etc you can have your messages read to you and reply etc without ever looking at the phone and all these make those of us who do long drives have a much nicer experience.

It’s an absolutely crazy suggestion to ban data you might as well say we should ban driving.

I also agree with the op, the limit is too low should be set up allow the average man to have 3 pints or so and drive home and morning bagging is a disgrace.

No, it's not. If you can't drive without the need to have a few pints on board then you are not fit to be on the roads.

[Deleted User]

Steve wrote: »

Could you not download them before the journey?

If you're using data through your cars UI then you're not posting on facebook or uploading things to Insta, it's fully voice controlled and you get up your maps, switch between music and podcasts etc. You never take your hands off the wheel or have anything onscreen that needs attention.

I don't see how banning that would make a difference, it's like banning speaking or radios.

mzungu

Emiliano Many Cardinal wrote: »

Well firstly the limits are too low which is why people are over in the morning and secondly you are in a totally different frame of mind. You have slept, had your breakfast and are awake and ready for the day not on a buzz from a night out etc. Sure it’s only in the last few years anyone even mentioned the morning after, everyone just drove the next day afte a sleep and never even considered it an issue. It’s nanny state stuff as usual.

One sure fire way to not be over the limit the morning after, is to not drink the night before.

votecounts

Elemonator wrote: »

This is insane.

3 pints affects everyone differently. I've seen lads down three pints and not a breeze on them. I've seen others drink 3 and get sick. Only a few short years ago, a girl I knew was out socialising with friends. Got offered a lift home with a man on a few pints. The journey was 3km. On that straight road, he drove into a wall and killed her instantly.

The tolerance for drink driving should be no pints. If you cannot socialise without alcohol, that's your problem.

Totally agree, yet there will be idiots like the healy raes and their ilk who say you should be allowed 3 pints.

blade1

Balanadan wrote: »

I remember the old days,

about 5 years ago,

Simpler times.

FFS I thought you were going to to say the 50's or 60's

[Deleted User]

mzungu wrote: »

One sure fire way to not be over the limit the morning after, is to not drink the night before.

Yeah great solution that :rolleyes:, allow stupid over zealous rules influence your life. A man should be allowed to enjoy this night and go about his business the next day.

I really hate idiotic suggestions like “sure don’t drink” which to me is not a solution as drinking is something I love doing.

We aren’t talking about lads hammered here, the old limit that served us just fine for years and still serves many countries would make a bit difference to the next morning but no idiot Ross had to be let loose.

Twenty Grand

Emiliano Many Cardinal wrote: »

Yeah great solution that :rolleyes:, allow stupid over zealous rules influence your life. A man should be allowed to enjoy this night and go about his business the next day.

I really hate idiotic suggestions like “sure don’t drink” which to me is not a solution as drinking is something I love doing.

We aren’t talking about lads hammered here, the old limit that served us just fine for years and still serves many countries would make a bit difference to the next morning but no idiot Ross had to be let loose.

A man should be allowed to go about his business and not be cut down by some fool who woke up drunk and got into a car.

CoBo55 wrote: »

They have, it's used regularly in the US, walk a straight line, count backwards etc etc.

Those tests don't work unless you're fairly intoxicated.
The alcohol level we have here is much lower than what those tests were designed to detect.

lawred2

Emiliano Many Cardinal wrote: »

Yeah great solution that :rolleyes:, allow stupid over zealous rules influence your life. A man should be allowed to enjoy this night and go about his business the next day.

I really hate idiotic suggestions like “sure don’t drink” which to me is not a solution as drinking is something I love doing.

We aren’t talking about lads hammered here, the old limit that served us just fine for years and still serves many countries would make a bit difference to the next morning but no idiot Ross had to be let loose.

Couldn't give a toss what you love doing when it reduces your ability to drive safely.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Bobtheman wrote: »

I realise we have to have laws on this but to be honest I wonder if the checkpoints in the morning should be done way with ? Or perhaps less checkpoints overall?

I honestly think its ok to drive a short distance (1-3 miles) with 3 pints. There I said it . We allow people to drink heavily which is always a health risk but seem hell bent on persecuting people with a few pints? Im talking about rural areas.

No I dont drive drunk. Never have.

Well firstly, we’re not okay as a society with people drinking heavily and then driving.

Secondly, the legalisation has to cover a wide range of people. The law needs to take into account those who would be not be fit to drive after two or three drinks. I don’t drive but I know I’m impaired after two pints.

mzungu

Emiliano Many Cardinal wrote: »

Yeah great solution that :rolleyes:, allow stupid over zealous rules influence your life. A man should be allowed to enjoy this night and go about his business the next day.

I really hate idiotic suggestions like “sure don’t drink” which to me is not a solution as drinking is something I love doing.

It is a great solution. If you feel the need for a drink that badly then you might have a dependence problem? Or perhaps an issue with personal responsibility? You can't go around doing whatever the hell you want just because that's the way that you want to do things.

If you want to have a skinful of pints then either get a taxi the following morning or get somebody else to drive you where you need to go. If neither of those options are available, then just don't drink. Your entire world won't fall asunder if you go out and don't have a few jars.

Emiliano Many Cardinal wrote: »

We aren’t talking about lads hammered here, the old limit that served us just fine for years and still serves many countries would make a bit difference to the next morning but no idiot Ross had to be let loose.

Shane Ross is right because there needs to be zero acceptance of the dangerous culture of "having a few for the road" that Ireland was famous for before the 1990s. The old limit did not "serve us fine" at all, we used to have a lot more fatalities.

I am hoping Shane Ross goes further with his anti-drink driving measures as to my mind the limit is still not low enough.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Candie wrote: »

Now it's virtue signalling to object to drunk driving? It's right up there with snowflake as both an overused and ill-advisedly used term.

Throw ‘fake news’ in there as well.

Rubberchikken

any tool who thinks its clever to drink and drive wouldnt be capable of walking a straight line or counting forward never mind backward.

if a person cant manage to respect the law then either walk or taxi to the bloody pub or just have a drink at home. either way people need to cop on.

[Deleted User]

Candie wrote: »

If you're using data through your cars UI then you're not posting on facebook or uploading things to Insta, it's fully voice controlled and you get up your maps, switch between music and podcasts etc. You never take your hands off the wheel or have anything onscreen that needs attention.

I don't see how banning that would make a difference, it's like banning speaking or radios.

It's not like speaking or listening to the radio. The degree of concentration required to interact by voice with any of these apps is in a different league to the degree of concentration required in a normal conversation. It is a distraction to safe driving.

Emiliano Many Cardinal wrote: »

Yeah great solution that :rolleyes:, allow stupid over zealous rules influence your life. A man should be allowed to enjoy this night and go about his business the next day.

I really hate idiotic suggestions like “sure don’t drink” which to me is not a solution as drinking is something I love doing.

We aren’t talking about lads hammered here, the old limit that served us just fine for years and still serves many countries would make a bit difference to the next morning but no idiot Ross had to be let loose.

And the women should stay at home and mind the children, right?

Under the 'old limit that served us just fine', about 400 people were being killed each year on the roads. This is now down to about 150 each year, which is still way too much.

[Deleted User]

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's not like speaking or listening to the radio. The degree of concentration required to interact by voice with any of these apps is in a different league to the degree of concentration required in a normal conversation. It is a distraction to safe driving.

It genuinely is and I wouldn't use it if I thought it wasn't. It doesn't matter if you're saying put on a podcast to your voice command or another person, there's no difference that I can see and I am a very cautious driver. It's much safer than taking your hand off the wheel to select different radio stations in an older car, for example.

If I felt it was in any way a problem, I simply wouldn't use it.

Timberrrrrrrr

Some lads want to go back to these "good old days"

https://twitter.com/Niall_Boylan/status/1082004904397471746?s=19

Anf yes i know its a p1ss take lads but thats how some of you would want it to be by the sounds of things.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Steve wrote: »

Disable all mobile data if the user is travelling over 5kph...

Watch the road deaths drop.

Steve wrote: »

Really?

Less crashes = less passengers dead... How is that not good?

Road deaths have been steadily on the decline in Ireland since the turn of the millennium (taking in the advent of the mobile era).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_road_traffic_accidents_deaths_in_Republic_of_Ireland_by_year

I’m sure there are myriad reasons for this but I’d be interested to know how much of a factor mobile phones and then the smartphone era are on road fatalities in Ireland. And how much the increasing stigma of drink-driving has affected those statistics.

Amirani

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

There is no 'right to drive' with or without a licence. Rights are set out in the constitution or in law. There is no 'right to drive' full stop..

There is more than 1 meaning of the word "right". They're not exclusively legal in nature, you can have moral/ethical or natural rights for example.

I'm not talking about constitutional rights obviously, why you seem to think I am I have no idea.

El_Bee

Bobtheman wrote: »

I honestly think its ok to drive a short distance (1-3 miles) with 3 pints. There I said it . We allow people to drink heavily which is always a health risk but seem hell bent on persecuting people with a few pints? Im talking about rural areas.
.

I think people caught drink driving should be publicly flogged, I'm not joking, being flippant or sarcastic, scour the c*nts.

Miike

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Who's drinking the three pints, though?

I know people who are fine on four or five pints. I know people who are twisted after one and a half. And that's before we start taking into account the strength of what they're drinking. The range can be anything from 4% to 7% alcohol on some of the stuff you can buy in the supermarket.

There has to be some universal denominator.

This. I wouldn't be safe to drive a fisher price trike after a pint and half but I don't really drink so there's that.

BAC is the only way to level the playing field imho

Bigmac1euro

I can almost guarantee with 100% certainty that anyone who drinks posting on this thread has drove over the limit the following morning without realizing.
It amuses me to watch people post as if they are gods gift and have never put a foot wrong.
Ps. those tester kits you buy in the shop are not nearly as accurate as the tests the Garda use.

Bobtheman

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Bobtheman wrote: »

I realise we have to have laws on this but to be honest I wonder if the checkpoints in the morning should be done way with ? Or perhaps less checkpoints overall?

I honestly think its ok to drive a short distance (1-3 miles) with 3 pints. There I said it . We allow people to drink heavily which is always a health risk but seem hell bent on persecuting people with a few pints? Im talking about rural areas.

No I dont drive drunk. Never have.

And if someone did this and killed a member of your family you would be ok with them not being prosecuted because they had only had the 3 pints and driving a short distance?

Nope. If you are cause an accident then you go to jail. No contradiction there

Bobtheman

lawred2 wrote: »

Emiliano Many Cardinal wrote: »

Yeah great solution that :rolleyes:, allow stupid over zealous rules influence your life. A man should be allowed to enjoy this night and go about his business the next day.

I really hate idiotic suggestions like “sure don’t drink” which to me is not a solution as drinking is something I love doing.

We aren’t talking about lads hammered here, the old limit that served us just fine for years and still serves many countries would make a bit difference to the next morning but no idiot Ross had to be let loose.

Couldn't give a toss what you love doing when it reduces your ability to drive safely.

What bull****. Crazy drivers on the road all the time. Most of whom have no booze.
You base society's views on what? The law doesn't always reflect popular opinion. A lot of people will say one thing and think another.

Allinall

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

There is no 'right to drive' with or without a licence. Rights are set out in the constitution or in law. There is no 'right to drive' full stop.

It's not pedantry. It is an important distinction for discussions like this.

Of course there is a right to drive.

If you’re not disqualified from driving by age, lack of license or any other reason, then by default you have a right to drive.

You are completely wrong in saying rights are set out in the constitution or in law.