Sensible Topic Scotland drink drive limit

kopernikus

kopernikus

Inactive User
Joined
Sep 3, 2009
Messages
283
Reaction score
133
Location
Central Scotland
More bad news today for Scottish drivers. The Scottish Parliament have reduced the drink/drive blood/alcohol limit from 80 to 50 mg/100ml blood. In general it will do little to reduce road accidents. The Scottish Parliaments own figures state that 10% of all accidents involving fatalities and injury are caused by drivers over the current alcohol limit. If that is true then drivers who haven't been drinking are causing 90%, or 9 out of 10 of these accidents. What is their excuse?? Have they been eating, taking drugs or methadone, using their mobile phone, smoking pot or taking legal highs or are they just rank bad drivers.? Why are they not also being targeted.?
I can see the Plod waiting in the bushes at dawn each morning to catch anyone who had a couple of drinks the previous day and who may probably be just over the new limit. This hardly makes them drunk drivers. The outcome will be that lots of working people who drive for a living will be deprived of their livelyhood whilst the majority, those causing 90% of the carnage, will escape scot free.
 
Its a good thing and should be adopted country wide, tbh it should be zero. How many folk will now not bother having the odd pint (that leads to 2 or 3) If its zero tolerance it removes all element of doubt. The biggest problem is going to be the morning after drivers. If it saves 1 life its worth it in my view
 
kopernikus said:
More bad news today for Scottish drivers. The Scottish Parliament have reduced the drink/drive blood/alcohol limit from 80 to 50 mg/100ml blood. In general it will do little to reduce road accidents. The Scottish Parliaments own figures state that 10% of all accidents involving fatalities and injury are caused by drivers over the current alcohol limit. If that is true then drivers who haven't been drinking are causing 90%, or 9 out of 10 of these accidents. What is their excuse?? Have they been eating, taking drugs or methadone, using their mobile phone, smoking pot or taking legal highs or are they just rank bad drivers.? Why are they not also being targeted.?
I can see the Plod waiting in the bushes at dawn each morning to catch anyone who had a couple of drinks the previous day and who may probably be just over the new limit. This hardly makes them drunk drivers. The outcome will be that lots of working people who drive for a living will be deprived of their livelyhood whilst the majority, those causing 90% of the carnage, will escape scot free.
Click to expand...


You are wrong . It does. If you are over the limit then you are not fully in control so should not be driving. Its our responsibility to protect our livelihood
 
way to go also should be zero tolerance as already being caught today shows the wide scale of the problem

would agree should be clamping down on use of mobile phones etc also out of control
 
funny how people can sit in a pub and sink half there wages but cant pay for a taxi

as for phones everyone l see these days is women on them
 
Having been stopped at 11:30pm for a faulty headlight, I failed the breathalyser on ONE pint!

Arrested and hauled to nearest Police Station where I passed.

Got to within a mile of my house and was stopped for a faulty headlight!

Showed the guys my pass sheet and they laughed, said sh*t night mate, away home and get your light fixed soonest.

Arrived home 6:20am, breakfast then off to work, knackered.

Guess what? Don't bother any more!
 
Thanks for your responses. I expected some constructive replies and that is what I got. Just to put the record straight I am in full support of the lower limits. My car was written off and both I and my niece injured by a 35 year old drug addict in a 4WD who had no tax/insurance/licence, and had never taken a test. My point was that it will not deter the serious drink drivers, and those under the influence or distraction of something else. Meanwhile, the other 90% of idiots will continue to kill hundreds and maim thousands. The Plod, instead of being out at night, will now use road blocks in the morning to keep their arrest rates from falling . We will see in a years time how effective this policy will effect the casualty rates. In the meantime the carnage will continue.
 
well i am tea total cant wait to get pissed at new year lol.
tea total well coffee total lol
drink drive no drink and drive 0% limit.
hope all have a good night i will never remember it lol lmao
HAPPY NEW YEAR ALL.
 
I personally have zero tolerance for drink-drivers, and I am very happy to see that is the general consensus on this thread. A school friend of mine was killed by a drunk driver who mounted the pavement, and I passed the scene only minutes later on my bike, it could so easily have been me. By reducing the limit it will make more people think about even having the one drink- which IMO is still one too many- and yes, DO get the 'morning after' drivers. FFS the roads are full of commuters, kids on their way to school etc., just the time when you need to be most alert. Of course it won't end the carnage, and it probably won't deter the "I'll be OK as long as I don't get stopped" clowns, but any reduction in accidents fatal or otherwise, has to be a positive.
So a safe and happy (ban & accident-free) new year to all.
 
I agree with this, if you had a drink you shouldn't drive not matter how much you have had or how strong it is.

trevortron said:
I personally have zero tolerance for drink-drivers, and I am very happy to see that is the general consensus on this thread. A school friend of mine was killed by a drunk driver who mounted the pavement, and I passed the scene only minutes later on my bike, it could so easily have been me. By reducing the limit it will make more people think about even having the one drink- which IMO is still one too many- and yes, DO get the 'morning after' drivers. FFS the roads are full of commuters, kids on their way to school etc., just the time when you need to be most alert. Of course it won't end the carnage, and it probably won't deter the "I'll be OK as long as I don't get stopped" clowns, but any reduction in accidents fatal or otherwise, has to be a positive.
So a safe and happy (ban & accident-free) new year to all.
Click to expand...
 
I am also in the same frame of mind as others and that is of zero tolerance.

In fact I go further and think that all forms of activity that takes your concentration away from actually driving and being in control of your vehicle should be banned. That includes eating, smoking (lighting cigs especially), phone calls (even hands free as most people concentrate on the call still), texting, programming sat nav's, radio's etc... It can only take a second to make a difference between reacting to a situation and missing it and causing a crash or worse.

It may be a complete lockdown and some people may disagree, but if 1 in 10 accidents are caused by drink driving then the other 9 must be caused by something else, and I bet a lack of concentration scores highly.
 
Captin said:
eating, smoking (lighting cigs especially), phone calls (even hands free as most people concentrate on the call still), texting, programming sat nav's, radio's etc....
Click to expand...

Whilst I tend to agree, can you imagine them trying to police that lot? Hell they've never even managed to keep people off their phones!
 
I think an awareness campaign on the dangers of distraction would have an impact. They could use some of the money hoovered up in fines to finance it ;)
 
IANB said:
I think an awareness campaign on the dangers of distraction would have an impact. They could use some of the money hoovered up in fines to finance it ;)
Click to expand...

It would possibly have a minimal effect on a limited number of drivers for a short time. Most drivers know when they're doing something wrong ( me included) but are willing to take the chance.
If they really wanted to cut down on accidents and road deaths technology could easily be brought in. GPS-enabled speed restriction, biometric-coupled sobriety testing, GSM blocking, even awakeness detection- the list could go on, but people want their freedom and won't take happily to measures such as these. However, if insurance companies could see the value in these and offer substantial discounts (especially to high-risk categories) then we might begin to get somewhere.
 
I think its only a matter of time until we see gps speed restriction. The tech is there it just needs to be enabled.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

O
    • Like
New car tax rates from April 1 could cost petrol and diesel drivers hundreds of pounds
Replies
9
Views
709
D 8 RCS
D 8 RCS
O
    • Like
Will have to take other half out then.....
Replies
3
Views
600
gez
gez
Rumpelstiltskin.
    • Like
Viaplay: Broadcaster of Scotland games and Scottish League Cup to pull out of UK
Replies
1
Views
344
alimac
alimac
S
    • Like
    • Haha
A Glass Of Wine Or Water?
Replies
1
Views
502
Rumpelstiltskin.
Rumpelstiltskin.
chookey
    • Like
Immigration lawyers
2
Replies
27
Views
1K
silverdale
silverdale
Back
Top