Scottish Government to lower drink drive limit

Scottish Government to lower drink drive limit

Author
Discussion

jith

2,752 posts

214 months

Monday 28th May 2012
quotequote all
GreigM said:
jith said:
By the way Greig, I see you spend half your time in New York. Do you actually do anything there to support your own country, i.e. Scotland?
I own a company which is an exporter from the UK to the US. We represent Scotland at Tartan Week every year. We were recognised by Mayor Bloomberg as a good example of the bond between Scotland and New York - is that good enough for you?

As for the "idiots" comment - on this issue I stand by it, the SNP have a new shiny thing in terms of laws and are playing with it for the benefit of political posturing rather than the benefit of the people. I was previously a supporter of the SNP in terms that I believe they are (and have proven to be) a better government for Scotland than Labour as they are focused somewhat on the needs of Scotland rather than Westminster.

Gaining a majority has been a bad thing for the SNP - they have lost focus on what is good for the day to day running of the country and what the people of Scotland want and are singularly focused on the independence vote, and policies like this are a good example of why that is a bad thing - you seem to agree. So yes, on this point I will call the SNP government idiots and their push on independence has lost my vote.

I look forward to the day the SNP lose the independence vote and can re-focus as being a good government who can fight for Scotland within the UK (rather than the Westminster controlled lackies which are Labour).

Just because I don't support independence doesn't make me anti-Scottish as your bile seems to suggest. Contrary to your view you can be Scottish and passionate about Scotland, without agreeing with independence - and in fact most of Scotland agrees with this point. Having an opinion which doesn't line up with yours doesn't make someone else uneducated.
My God Greig, you couldn't be more off the mark! If the majority of Scots don't want independence as you imply, why is there such a swing to SNP? Why do they now have a majority government in the Scottish Parliament?

Left wing socialists? Absolute nonsense!

I am involved in a project just now with the Scottish Government that will be revealed hopefully in a couple of months from now that will demonstrate just how potent a force an independent Scotland will be. Watch this space.

J

simoid

19,772 posts

157 months

Monday 28th May 2012
quotequote all
jith said:
If the majority of Scots don't want independence as you imply, why is there such a swing to SNP? Why do they now have a majority government in the Scottish Parliament?
You might need to sit down for this one:

Not everyone that votes SNP wants independence, not everyone that doesn't vote/votes elsewhere wants the current UK.




P.S. Clickysmile


Edited by simoid on Monday 28th May 15:11

Derek Smith

45,514 posts

247 months

Monday 28th May 2012
quotequote all
simoid said:
I know of a large gentleman, of around 5 ft 11 and 16 stone, who had 2 pints of a light ale (3.5% ABV) and failed a breathalyser.

I reckon a large number of people would be over the limit on a pint of lager.

In general, I think bad idea. If lowering the limit was a solution to a problem, the limit would be 0 alcohol in the system.
I used to do a lot of drink drive, especially in the winter and when it was cold. I've never known anyone to admit to a skinfull. It's always two and a half pints or perhaps three glasses of wine. It's what everyone says. In my time I've never known anyone to be over the limit, nor even approaching the limit, with just four units. The government put out the figure of two pints when the dd limit was first introduced and there was no evidence to support it. It was just a figure pulled out of the air and so people used it whenever they were banned. "I only had a pint and half."

Generally speaking, women peak earlier and higher and most women would not be near the (current) limit on four units.

There was a rather famous case back in the old days where a chap suggested one of his drinks had been spiked. The barman was able to say that the chap had something like 8 units of alcohol to his, and the driver's, knowledge. However, there was 'evidence' to suggest that one drink may have been spiked and, as he was so near the limit, he was found NG.

You can push your reading up quickly by consuming alcohol rapidly. However, the body takes time to absorb it and so the level is spread over a period of time. If this chap, if this big chap, consumed two pints within half an hour then absorption would still be spread out over a period.

If he was fit and thin then this can push his reading up higher and earlier.

Whilst there is a norm, some people take a lot longer to get rid of the alcohol than others, I've been told by a factor of 4 although this is one bit where I've not seen any evidence to support. What this means is that some people stay over the limit, and intoxicated, for longer that others.

Despite having the responsbility of reviewing cases in DD for my force for some three years I never came across anyone who had only drunk 4 units and was over the limit.

otolith

55,899 posts

203 months

Monday 28th May 2012
quotequote all
Derek Smith said:
Despite having the responsbility of reviewing cases in DD for my force for some three years I never came across anyone who had only drunk 4 units and was over the limit.
Are you saying that nobody claimed to have drunk only 4 units, or that of those who did, all were proven to have done otherwise (proven independently of the alcohol reading)?

jith

2,752 posts

214 months

Monday 28th May 2012
quotequote all
simoid said:
jith said:
If the majority of Scots don't want independence as you imply, why is there such a swing to SNP? Why do they now have a majority government in the Scottish Parliament?
You might need to sit down for this one:

Not everyone that votes SNP wants independence, not everyone that doesn't vote/votes elsewhere wants the current UK.




P.S. Clickysmile


Edited by simoid on Monday 28th May 15:11
Sit down? I'm rolling around the floor laughing! Are you honestly trying to tell me that Kellner is objective and doesn't have a vested interest in keeping Scotland in the Union?

His wife's a Labour MP for god's sake! Read some of his stuff thoroughly and then try and argue that it is unbiased.

Labour are finished in Scotland. They have let the Scots down too many times. The truth is that the only way that the union would be preserved in Scotland is if Labour won back the majority. It will never happen now.

J

daz3210

5,000 posts

239 months

Monday 28th May 2012
quotequote all
Has anyone thought that the rest of the UK may not want Scotland to remain part of the Union?

As an Englishman I get pretty peeved when I look at other parts of the UK, and what they get that I don't.

e.g.
Free Prescriptions
Their own Parliaments/Assemblies (Yes we have Westminster, but the Scottish, Welsh and Irish also get to vote)
Free Education
etc.

I cannot see how it can be cost effective for separate government assemblies to exist, but they do. SO perhaps now is the time to cut loose Scotland and let them stand on their own feet. But will they truly be able to do this? As I understand it the Scottish population is around 6 million. Will there be enough tax revenue to pay the bills?

And once the rest of Britain has lost the Scottish MP's, how would that leave the balance of power in Westminster?

As for the drink drive question, I once blew into a breathalyser after eight bottles (330ml) of Budweiser (5% abv), and only registered 38 and 40 on the two tests. I'm 5ft 7 and about 16 stone (and before anyone gets arsy, it was at a show on a Police demo stand and I had no intention of driving).

simoid

19,772 posts

157 months

Monday 28th May 2012
quotequote all
jith said:
Sit down? I'm rolling around the floor laughing! Are you honestly trying to tell me that Kellner is objective and doesn't have a vested interest in keeping Scotland in the Union?
No, you'd need to sit down due to the shock of learning that supporting the SNP doesn't mean supporting leaving the UK...

Comprehension FTW.

That link was just a post scriptum, of the most recent press release of an opinion poll related google. seems to say that less than a 1/3 of their respondants favoured independence, but I suppose that's invalid for some reason or another.

oldsoak

5,618 posts

201 months

Monday 28th May 2012
quotequote all
TPS said:
Sorry oldsoak but I think your talking nonsense while trying to make a point.
Possibly..it's this hot weather addling my brain...pehaps I should've just said most drivers take no notice of limits anyway and had done with it?


TPS said:
The offence/punishment of drink driving is far more severe than going slightly over the speed limit.
Yet to be punished for either offence you need to be over a limit...(and be caught of course) ...no?

TPS said:
I am sure there are many people who may exceed the speed limit by 10 or 20 mph on the motorway but would never dream of drink driving.
I'm sure there are. I'm also sure that some of them whether they be exceeding a speed limit or drink driving, would use the excuse of 'I didn't know I was that far over the limit' if caught too...

TPS said:
I do agree that the problem will nerver go away though.
So not all nonsense then...

tongue out

Derek Smith

45,514 posts

247 months

Monday 28th May 2012
quotequote all
otolith said:
Are you saying that nobody claimed to have drunk only 4 units, or that of those who did, all were proven to have done otherwise (proven independently of the alcohol reading)?
I'm saying what I said.

I have suspicions that these people, some of whom were unable to stand unaided, had not, as they stated, only had a pint and a half. But I can't prove it. Some cases have been proved where drivers have told porkies. There was a classic some years ago, pre prescribed limits, when there was a defence of the driver's memory being affected because he was so drunk, so he hadn't told lies.

I don't think I've ever had anyone who said they'd had a skinful.

However, I know that in the experiments that we performed and those I was given records of, even half a pint can modify performance. It changes perception, slightly, but measurably.

Some say stuff like: it improves driving ability at low levels. But it is a drug and so this 'improvement' is brought about by chemical changes to the brain.

Perhpas its first effect is on memory.

pingu393

7,721 posts

204 months

Monday 28th May 2012
quotequote all
It's easy to test on a simulator (like GP3).

I find that quali times improve, but I crash into others more during the race. Conclusion = confidence/focus increases, but reaction time to the unexpected is reduced.

Back on thread - I'd race for the border in a very determined and focussed way (hitting every apex) and just hope there were no unexpected stingers or pot holes to avoid smile.

mybrainhurts

90,809 posts

254 months

Monday 28th May 2012
quotequote all
Idiots in government being idiots in government.

Nothing changes...

mjb1

2,552 posts

158 months

Tuesday 29th May 2012
quotequote all
I don't think it'll make much difference in reality. The hardened drink drivers that are over the current limit will continue to take the pee (until caught). The average person who has a single drink when dining out will probably not want to risk even that any more (even though they are highly unlikely to break the new limit with one pint).

I know someone who failed the roadside test and blew 40 twice at the station (and was let off, right on the limit). He'd had 4 or 5 pints of strong beer (5%) over the course of two hours. Incidentally, he was only pulled for a tail light and they weren't even going to breathalise him until he told them he was drink driving.

Everyone metabolises alcohol at different rates, but you have to drink a fair amount to blow higher than 40 (definitely way more than the guideline 2 pints of average beer). You can be sure that anyone who gets done for drink driving has had way more regardless of what they try and say.

Nigel Worc's

8,121 posts

187 months

Tuesday 29th May 2012
quotequote all
Aren't we all getting a bit excited here ?

Wouldn't they actually need to gain independance before they can do this ?

Olivera

7,068 posts

238 months

Tuesday 29th May 2012
quotequote all
Nigel Worc's said:
Aren't we all getting a bit excited here ?

Wouldn't they actually need to gain independance before they can do this ?
You do realise Scotland has it's own parliament, legal system and now much enhanced legislative powers under the 2012 Scotland Act? So the answer is very much no. Still a ste idea though.

Nigel Worc's

8,121 posts

187 months

Tuesday 29th May 2012
quotequote all
Olivera said:
Nigel Worc's said:
Aren't we all getting a bit excited here ?

Wouldn't they actually need to gain independance before they can do this ?
You do realise Scotland has it's own parliament, legal system and now much enhanced legislative powers under the 2012 Scotland Act? So the answer is very much no. Still a ste idea though.
I realise it, but I can't get to grips with the thought of how they'd ban me for example ,(not that I drink drive, but I'm English, with a UK licence), for being over a limit in one part of the union, but under it in another, if you can see my point.

I can't see how they could do this, proper EU countries can't, so how could a non country such as Scotland ?


Edited to add, no offence to any Scots, England and Wales are also "non countries", we are Great Britain or the United Kingdom .... for now at least

Edited by Nigel Worc's on Tuesday 29th May 02:10

simoid

19,772 posts

157 months

Tuesday 29th May 2012
quotequote all
Why is Great Britain a country then?

wink

/pointless pedantry



Kenny McAskill (our justice chap) reckons this will stop people beong unsure about whether it's ok to drive after a couple of units of alcohol. His advice is."don't drive if you drink, and if you do drink, only have one."

Wasn't this always the advice anyway?!

I'd be interested to know:

a) anyone who will change their behaviour from having 2 or 3 pints (probably thinking they're risking it if tested on the way home) to only having one. Clearly they don't think there is a huge risk of being stopped/caught.

b) how many accidents will be saved by a law that is likely to be ignored.



ETA:

Could this even have a negative effect on the social stigma of drink driving?

It lowers the 'shame factor' of the offence if the public feels that one can be convicted after such a small amount of alcohol.

Edited by simoid on Tuesday 29th May 10:25

daz3210

5,000 posts

239 months

Tuesday 29th May 2012
quotequote all
simoid said:
Why is Great Britain a country then?
Its a Monarchy, so called because it has a Monarch at the helm.

America on the other hand is by tradition a country.

As for the drink drive limit, how would you stand if spotted by Scottish Police, but stopped over the border in England (be it by either Scottish or English coppers). Which limit would apply?

otolith

55,899 posts

203 months

Tuesday 29th May 2012
quotequote all
Derek Smith said:
otolith said:
Are you saying that nobody claimed to have drunk only 4 units, or that of those who did, all were proven to have done otherwise (proven independently of the alcohol reading)?
I'm saying what I said.

I have suspicions that these people, some of whom were unable to stand unaided, had not, as they stated, only had a pint and a half. But I can't prove it. Some cases have been proved where drivers have told porkies. There was a classic some years ago, pre prescribed limits, when there was a defence of the driver's memory being affected because he was so drunk, so he hadn't told lies.
In that case, while I entirely believe that your suspicions were correct, there is a circularity in your thinking - you don't think four units is enough to make anyone drunk enough to blow over, because you never saw anyone blow over who wasn't too drunk in your opinion to have consumed only four units.

simoid

19,772 posts

157 months

Tuesday 29th May 2012
quotequote all
daz3210 said:
simoid said:
Why is Great Britain a country then?
Its a Monarchy, so called because it has a Monarch at the helm.

America on the other hand is by tradition a country.

As for the drink drive limit, how would you stand if spotted by Scottish Police, but stopped over the border in England (be it by either Scottish or English coppers). Which limit would apply?
Depends where you broke the law, shirley. You can be at 35 alcohols or whatever in England, but crossing the border means you break the law. In the same way that if our motorways change to 80mph limits, you can't expect to get away with 79 down the southernmost part of the M74.

My pendantic and pointless point was, we are not Great Britain, we are the United Kingdom of GB and NI, etc smile

Snowboy

8,028 posts

150 months

Tuesday 29th May 2012
quotequote all
Nigel Worc's said:
I realise it, but I can't get to grips with the thought of how they'd ban me for example ,(not that I drink drive, but I'm English, with a UK licence), for being over a limit in one part of the union, but under it in another, if you can see my point.
That’s a very good question actually.
It’ll be interesting to see how it stands up in court if someone appeals.

I agree with what’s been said about it just being political posturing from the SNP too.

If Scotland does get independence it’s going to be screwed.
They don’t have enough self revenue to keep themselves afloat – there’s North Sea oil, but there’s some fun discussions to be had about who that will belong to if Scotland leaves the UK.
A few Scots seem to think it’s all going to be theirs, but that’s a lot like the Argentineans wanting the oil around the Falklands.
It might be closest to you, but it’s not yours.
The whole question of what happens to UK or Scottish coastal waters is nowhere near answered.

It has no standing military. Salmond was arguing that all regiments with Highland or Scottish in the name should be given to Scotland. I can’t see that happening though.
Although a lot of them are proud Scottish regiments they have also sworn allegiance to the Queen and Crown – so that’s going to be a great bloody mess too.

Westminster would be very different without the Scottish politicians too.
There’s already a lot of grumbling about why Scottish MPs get to vote on English decisions.

From a personal POV, I like Scotland.
It’s a great part of the UK.
A lot of people spent their lives bringing the different parts of the UK together under one flag so we’d be a great nation.
I just wish more people from all parts of the UK would take pride in their country rather than keep trying to break it apart.