Drink Drive Limit To Be Lowered In Scotland - Page 3 - Anything Goes - Other topics not covered elsewhere - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Drink Drive Limit To Be Lowered In Scotland


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 453
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I can't understand the negative reaction to this unless i assume you're all hardened rattlers (drinkers) and are having anxiety issues about having to change the routines of a well worn habit.

Similiar reaction with the smoking ban (i was a smoker at the time)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose it will make people think twice the morning after, even more so than with the old limit.

I'm not sure that really tackles the problem though?

Biffer posted the research. It's not about a cure but reduction, studies show that about 12% less young folk die on the road if this in place. With a total lowering of fatalities by 5.7% or something (this is from memory when i read the pdf posted).

It won't solve drink driving, it's not intended to solve it, it will in the mean reduce the number of deaths from drink driving though. Even at the 0.5 NEW limit you're still 3 times more likely to be involved in a RTC Death than someone with zero.

"There is strong evidence that someone’s ability to drive is affected if they have

any alcohol in their blood. Drivers with a BAC of between 0.2 and 0.5 have at least a three times greater risk of dying in a vehicle crash. This risk

increases to at least six times with a BAC between 0.5 and 0.8, and to 11 times with a BAC between 0.8 and 0.10"

Edited by phart
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the choice of dying in a drink-related car crash or listening to MacAskill I'd choose the former.

Before making such a choice i feel behoven to inform you that you can not listen to Macaskill all the time, and there is no other binding action like dying in a drink related car-crash needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whit , classical music makes you a pish driver ?

Here's another thing they found, the more likely you are to put shit like furry dice and "accessories" on your car the more likely you are to have road rage. Due to your ego covering your car (by personalize it and making identity claims with it) the less personalisation equals less claims by the ego and then therefore less likely to have emotional reactions to situations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did hear his justice robes are on a shaky peg, so peace may soon be delivered.

I don't think i've read anything from him for years, ever since he devolved his ministerial powers to the christian sect interpretation of the Abrahamic god, who created the universe.

This isn't about religious dogma though, it's about peer-reviewed studies and actual observations of other countries.

Unless you're saying his religion is the driver for this and not the data acquired from the studies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think i've read anything from him for years, ever since he devolved his ministerial powers to the christian sect interpretation of the Abrahamic god, who created the universe.

This isn't about religious dogma though, it's about peer-reviewed studies and actual observations of other countries.

Unless you're saying his religion is the driver for this and not the data acquired from the studies.

The former would be a more credible source :wink2: .
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other than people seeing the headlines and thus less likely to risk driving after they've had a drink, I don't think this change will actually have much, if any impact.

As far as I've read it is only the blood limit that is changing, the breath limit is remaining at 35mg which is always the test carried out at the roadside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This doesn't actually tackle "drink driving". All it does is move the goal posts a little and criminalise people with a BAC of between 50 and 85(?)...

If there is any scientific evidence that shows that a BAC of (say) 55 is dangerous then fine. But please give me that evidence rather than bullshitting me that this is being done to tackle a hard core of drink drivers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This doesn't actually tackle "drink driving". All it does is move the goal posts a little and criminalise people with a BAC of between 50 and 85(?)...

If there is any scientific evidence that shows that a BAC of (say) 55 is dangerous then fine. But please give me that evidence rather than bullshitting me that this is being done to tackle a hard core of drink drivers.

the thread has all the evidence in it, Biffer posted it i reproduced some of it.

people with a BAC of 0.5 are 3 times more likely to have a FATAL accident than someone with zero and if you go with the current limit of 0.8 it's 6 times more likely (against zero)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other than people seeing the headlines and thus less likely to risk driving after they've had a drink, I don't think this change will actually have much, if any impact.

As far as I've read it is only the blood limit that is changing, the breath limit is remaining at 35mg which is always the test carried out at the roadside.

The breath limit is being reduced from 35mcg to 22mcg -

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/resource/0041/00416814.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The chances of being involved in a fatal crash with a BAC of zero are absolutely minuscule, so being six times more likely with a BAC of 50mg to 80mg doesn't really mean very much. I wouldn't get over-excited about being told I was six times more likely to win tomorrow night's Euromillions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The chances of being involved in a fatal crash with a BAC of zero are absolutely minuscule,

Most road deaths are speed or careless driving related, in around 20% of fatalities a driver is over the limit though I couldn't find out by how much. Age seems to be the biggest issue so don't get into a car with a boy under 24 driving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the thread has all the evidence in it, Biffer posted it i reproduced some of it.

people with a BAC of 0.5 are 3 times more likely to have a FATAL accident than someone with zero and if you go with the current limit of 0.8 it's 6 times more likely (against zero)

Cheers. Couldn't be arsed reading it as I don't have a spare month. I got a few pages in though...

Does it take into account that your are more likely to be killed within 3 miles of your home? (Presumably this overlaps with the above). And also twenty times more likely to get killed in the dark? (Which also overlaps). Just concerned that they aren't filtering out all the contributing factors here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Serious question but has it really changed much??

As far as I'm aware the road side breath test is measured by level of alcohol in the breath. As is the alcometer at the cop shop. This level hasn't changed as far as I can see. It's only those who elect the blood test after failing the initial tests who will be effected. So in effect just catches more chancers who were already over the current limit but play the system?

I'm in agreement with a reduction but it has to be sensible. I think this is a sensible reduction.

Edited by flynnyboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Serious question but has it really changed much??

As far as I'm aware the road side breath test is measured by level of alcohol in the breath. As is the alcometer at the cop shop. This level hasn't changed as far as I can see. It's only those who elect the blood test after failing the initial tests who will be effected. So in effect just catches more chancers who were already over the current limit but play the system?

I'm in agreement with a reduction but it has to be sensible. I think this is a sensible reduction.

The breath limit will be reduced from 35mcg to 22mcg.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cheers. Couldn't be arsed reading it as I don't have a spare month. I got a few pages in though...

Does it take into account that your are more likely to be killed within 3 miles of your home? (Presumably this overlaps with the above). And also twenty times more likely to get killed in the dark? (Which also overlaps). Just concerned that they aren't filtering out all the contributing factors here.

Yeah they took into account loads of the other variables in the equation so to harmonize the effect. This is described right at the start when they talk about "multivariate regression analysis"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The breath limit will be reduced from 35mcg to 22mcg.

I didn't know that, thanks for that. That is quite a serious reduction. Even one pint means it would be close. I'm thankful I get the train to work as that is very low and will cause many to be done the morning after. Not sure about how I feel about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent.

So the research and motives are sound then.

Its just the media coverage that needs sorted then...

Never taken a breath test and no idea what 50mg or 80mg actually feels like. I just think if we're penalising people who have chosen to be "responsible" by only having one then its not the best way to tackle the underlying problem. But if having one isn't actually "responsible" then lets educate people. And maybe lets extend the licencing hours so the driver can pick up a couple of cans of beer at Tescos after 10pm on the way home after getting all the piss heads home safe and sound...

Cheers! (Not in a slainte mhath kind of way).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't know that, thanks for that. That is quite a serious reduction. Even one pint means it would be close. I'm thankful I get the train to work as that is very low and will cause many to be done the morning after. Not sure about how I feel about that.

I got the impression from the Reporting Scotland reporter talking to a barman that 1 medium glass of wine or a half pint would now be the limit and that one pint or a very large wine was over the limit ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't know that, thanks for that. That is quite a serious reduction. Even one pint means it would be close. I'm thankful I get the train to work as that is very low and will cause many to be done the morning after. Not sure about how I feel about that.

Aye, even one pint will be touch and go. If I'm driving I won't touch a drop and that has been the case since I passed my test.

There are so many variables (gender, metabolism, size, whether the driver has eaten etc.) that it makes driving the next day a tricky judgment call - you could feel absolutely fine and find yourself with a breath count of 22 (the day after and with a falling alcohol level I don't think that makes someone a danger on the road - a tired driver would be a much bigger danger). The police may not actually prosecute at 22 - while the current breath limit is 35mcg I believe they don't prosecute at present if you're under 40. As others have said this does absolutely nothing to tackle the hardcore drink-drivers, who are the really dangerous ones on the road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think i've read anything from him for years, ever since he devolved his ministerial powers to the christian sect interpretation of the Abrahamic god, who created the universe.

This isn't about religious dogma though, it's about peer-reviewed studies and actual observations of other countries.

Unless you're saying his religion is the driver for this and not the data acquired from the studies.

Is he religious?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...