RE: RAC on DD

Friday 30th September 2005

RAC on DD

Police need resources to target Drink Drivers says RAC Foundation


Figures released yesterday revealed that of the 3221 deaths on the roads in 2004, 590 (18%) were related to drink driving.

In response to this news, the RAC Foundation is calling for more traffic police to target drink drivers and get them off the roads.

It is concerned that the reductions in the number killed and seriously injured in drink drive related accidents in the 1980s and early 1990s (from 9,000 to under 4,000) are no longer being made. The number killed fell to a low of 460 deaths in 1998 but has risen to an estimated 590 in 2004.

In 2003, 17 per cent of road deaths occurred when the driver was over the limit. In the early 1980’s around one third of drivers killed were over the limit.

Provisional figures show thirty five per cent of drivers and riders aged between 30-39 killed were over the limit compared to 30% of those aged 20-29 and 23% of those aged 16-19 in 2004.

Drivers aged less than thirty have the most drink drive accidents but the 17 – 24 age group are most at risk as they drive fewer miles. Seventeen to 19 year olds are more likely to have accidents so the proportion of those drink related will be lower.

Edmund King, executive director of the RAC Foundation said:

"We believe that more traffic police would be a deterrent to drink drivers. The lack of visible evidence of enforcement of drink driving adds to the perception that people can simply do it and get away with it. We need to see a greater police presence on our roads rather than just cameras."

"The facts prove that we have a growing problem with drinking and driving in the UK and that there is a need to understand why, despite years of campaigning, the problem still exists to this extent.

"The message is not getting through to some. It is horrifying to see that almost one fifth of drivers killed are over the legal limit.

Author
Discussion

Nimarni99

Original Poster:

8 posts

232 months

Friday 30th September 2005
quotequote all
How about a general drive of if you see a DD to ring a number and get the police on the case?

bigdods

7,174 posts

229 months

Friday 30th September 2005
quotequote all
Ring the BiB to report a possibly drunk driver ? hmm I have tried this on two occasions - both times on the motorway following cars that were weaving across all 3 lanes, braking, accelerating and generally not being in control. So me being a good citizen dials 999 on the hands free mobile and am politely asked by the police controller why I am calling them ? nothing we can do , 999 is for emergency calls only. I guess we have to wait until he kills someone huh *sigh*

mudge

18 posts

275 months

Friday 30th September 2005
quotequote all
Nimarni99 said:
How about a general drive of if you see a DD to ring a number and get the police on the case?
So how can you tell if someone is an offender?

This sounds like a very good way of encouraging malicious false alarms.

Peter

wab172uk

2,005 posts

229 months

Friday 30th September 2005
quotequote all
Drink driving is not a problem. Steeling car's is not a problem. Driving while under the influence of drugs is not a problem. Uninsured drivers are not a problem. Recless driving is not a problem. That is until they do 32 in a 30 zone, then they are criminals, then the police will move heaven and earth to catch them. Oh yes, and collect £60 for their effort. Sad but true.

Jay GTi

1,026 posts

225 months

Friday 30th September 2005
quotequote all
I'm not sure why this is a problem, surely speed cameras catch drunk drivers all the time? That's why we need more cameras and less dedicated TrafPol. Fantasic devices them speed cameras...

bunglist

545 posts

232 months

Friday 30th September 2005
quotequote all
Jay GTi said:
I'm not sure why this is a problem, surely speed cameras catch drunk drivers all the time? That's why we need more cameras and less dedicated TrafPol. Fantasic devices them speed cameras...




I hope you are only jesting about scamaras being fantastic devices.

If not, you are a sad fool, that believes all the shite doctored information that the government release about these devices.

Also you would not be saying this if one of your family or friends was killed by a muppet the can't use a taxi when they've been drinking.

motormonk

177 posts

230 months

Friday 30th September 2005
quotequote all
bunglist said:
I hope you are only jesting about scamaras being fantastic devices.


Err.. Read that again. it is obviously satire.

bunglist

545 posts

232 months

Friday 30th September 2005
quotequote all
motormonk said:

bunglist said:
I hope you are only jesting about scamaras being fantastic devices.



Err.. Read that again. it is obviously satire.



Thats the problem with typed comments you never know which way to take them.

Anyway how do you know this person doesn't think scameras are the greatest thing since sliced bread!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jay GTi

1,026 posts

225 months

Friday 30th September 2005
quotequote all
Sorry, things don't necessarily translate well in type, there was serious sarcasm in what I wrote (not as obvious as I thought).

My Grandfather and Cousin were both killed by drunk drivers, and surprise surprise both drunk drivers were driving below the speed limt at the time. Hence why I have rather a big problem with the this stupid 'War on Speeding' when it's allowing far more serious driving offences like this to increase!

Vipers

32,957 posts

230 months

Saturday 1st October 2005
quotequote all
Why dont we tighten up the law on convicted drunk drivers, like crush their cars, £1000 fine, 10 year ban for starters................ mean to say these days you get 30 days clink for not paying your community charge after all.

stenniso

350 posts

233 months

Monday 3rd October 2005
quotequote all
I should imagine the problem will get worse when the new licencing laws come in. People drinking to 4am then driving to work at 8am with less time to sleep it off.