Alcohol ?

[Integroo]

The limit in Scotland is lower - 0.05%. I wouldn't drink one pint and drive nowadays.

[Shnozz]

J4CKO said:

I used to go for work nights out and drive back, but it was two pints in the pub at 6, so finished drinking by seven and then went for a meal, no more beer and then drive home about 11, was comfortable with that but wouldn't drive straight away, pretty confident the bulk of the alcohol had left my system.

Weirdly, the thought that I had had anything that evening made me drive like a nun on the way back.

Anyone tried the breath testers you can buy ?

I have one of the alcosense ones that I bought a few years ago. It was one tested by (IIRC) Autoexpress and came in as fairly accurate and not the cheap Chinese ebay ones.

I never have a drink out and then get in a car and take the view that one pint is utterly pointless (says something about my drinking!) and may as well just have a soft drink rather than just a token one that the effects have no influence whatsoever.

I bought it for the mornings after the night before. I would never intentionally get in a car even slightly "at risk", and certainly wouldn't think about driving for a long while after a 2 - 3 am session. However, even when the pub is curtailed at 11pm, its nice to just double check if driving the next morning. That is the issue with zero tolerance in my view, you'd have to be almost tee total for days around driving on occasion even if you just liked a few glasses of wine with a meal etc.

I rarely have reason to use the tester to be honest as its very rare circumstances whereby I drive in the morning after a drink the night before, but particularly trips like Le Mans or a road trip whereby its stopping off at hotels, few drinks before bed and early(ish) on the road, its nice to double-check.

[anonymous-user]

kambites said:

Another issue is that blood alcohol is a very poor indicator of inebriation.

In a way the old American "can you walk in a straight line" test makes more sense than using blood alcohol level.

That's a myth. Research shows that alcohol affects everyone's ability to drive in much the same way. Just because somebody is a heavy drinker and "seems fine" doesn't mean they are unaffected. For example,

"Epidemiologic studies show that virtually all drivers with BACs (Blood Alcohol Concentration) above 0.08% to 0.10% are significantly more likely than sober drivers to cause a fatal motor vehicle crash. In landmark studies, Paul Zador calculated relative risks of fatal crash involvement at various BACs. Zador estimates that each increase of 0.02% in the BAC of a driver with non-zero BAC nearly doubles the risk of a fatal crash. "

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC29120...

[kambites]

rockin said:

That's a myth. Research shows that alcohol affects everyone's ability to drive in much the same way. Just because somebody is a heavy drinker and "seems fine" doesn't mean they are unaffected.

Hmm, that very much isn't the conclusion that the studies I've read (and the one I've been involved in) have come to.

By the way I'm not trying to argue that some people are capable of driving with no impairment at 0.10%+ BAC, I'm arguing that some people are severely impaired at a fraction of that. I certainly know people who would be incapable of driving a car after a pint which would put them well under the legal limit.

ETA: Obviously something has to be used to define a limit and perhaps BAC is the best thing there is overall but it's far from perfect.

Edited by kambites on Tuesday 15th January 17:06

[anonymous-user]

To my mind the key thing is to have some measurable point at which the state can say that's too much alcohol to be driving. I'm no fan of the "holier than thou" zero limit crew. There's a load of research been done that shows driving on medication, driving while unwell, driving while tired etc are at least as dangerous as a moderate consumption of alcohol.

[Road2Ruin]

Greg the Fish said:

On a similar note, old farmer chap that used to drink in my old local , PROPER out in the sticks. The entrance to his farm was about 50 metres from the pub but it was a two mile ish private lane to the house. Used to get proper pissed, again, someone must have dobbed because they were waiting by the entrance. He staggered up the road to the entrance and they tried to stop him............until he pointed out to them he was on his private land and, in his own inimitable way, told them to 'f*** off from it' He literally used to bounce of the hedgerows all the way up the lane His old Disco was f****d

Don't try this as it's completely untrue. If the land has public access it's treated the same way as the public highway. For example, if the postman can gain access without your express permission or if you expect people to use your drive as access then it's the public highway and dui applies. There may be areas on the farm however which could be treated as private, but I doubt the drive could.

[Cold]

Deep Thought said:

NotBenny said:

What I don't like is when you read about a driver who has killed someone after they've had 10 pints, way over the limit, and people use this as a reason to reduce the drink drive limit. That person knows they are over the limit and is choosing to drive.

The BBC are really bad for that sort of thing - "Calls for reduced limit on alchohol" - "on the back of calls to reduce the alchohol limit as new figures of alhcohol related road deaths are release, we speak to Maeve whos son was mowed down by a drunk last year. Maeve - do you think the limit should be reduced?"

Yep, it's similar to the calls for 20 or 30mph limits after some loon has a crash at 100mph+.

[Slow]

rockin said:

That's a myth. Research shows that alcohol affects everyone's ability to drive in much the same way. Just because somebody is a heavy drinker and "seems fine" doesn't mean they are unaffected. For example,

"Epidemiologic studies show that virtually all drivers with BACs (Blood Alcohol Concentration) above 0.08% to 0.10% are significantly more likely than sober drivers to cause a fatal motor vehicle crash. In landmark studies, Paul Zador calculated relative risks of fatal crash involvement at various BACs. Zador estimates that each increase of 0.02% in the BAC of a driver with non-zero BAC nearly doubles the risk of a fatal crash. "

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC29120...

Only doubles the risk?

I dont actually see a issue with that level of alcohol. You can tell if you shouldnt be behind the wheel based on common sense.

[kambites]

Slow said:

You can tell if you shouldnt be behind the wheel based on common sense.

The problem is alcohol inhibits ones common sense.

[Pothole]

captain_cynic said:

here in the UK there are so many alternatives to drinking and driving that you really don't need to risk it. Minicabs are affordable, public transport runs pretty well and a Premier Inn is cheap.

Utter tosh outside larger cities.

[Slow]

Road2Ruin said:

Greg the Fish said:

On a similar note, old farmer chap that used to drink in my old local , PROPER out in the sticks. The entrance to his farm was about 50 metres from the pub but it was a two mile ish private lane to the house. Used to get proper pissed, again, someone must have dobbed because they were waiting by the entrance. He staggered up the road to the entrance and they tried to stop him............until he pointed out to them he was on his private land and, in his own inimitable way, told them to 'f*** off from it' He literally used to bounce of the hedgerows all the way up the lane His old Disco was f****d

Don't try this as it's completely untrue. If the land has public access it's treated the same way as the public highway. For example, if the postman can gain access without your express permission or if you expect people to use your drive as access then it's the public highway and dui applies. There may be areas on the farm however which could be treated as private, but I doubt the drive could.

Not quite sure how correct this is. Me and younger brothers been driving our 1/2-3/4 mile long drive since age 14. Been up and down it drunk often to put stuff in the bins at the bottom the night before collection. Even had parties in the field attached to road + drive with people just drifting about and generally having fun with cars who have been on the driveway.

Just because the postie is allowed up means its a road which would mean seatbelts/mot/tax/insurance are required too?

[LuS1fer]

Having seen many an excess alcohol case, it is hard to draw any hard conclusion as most defendants lie about what they've drunk and/or may have drunk that night or the night before. Equally, I have heard tales of people passing the breathalyser when they really shouldn't.

Some impairment is bound to result from alcohol consumption but impairment will be far more noticeable if the person is a lousy driver, to start with. When my partner collects me from the pub, I often think I could still drive better than she does, sober... but don't tell her or I'll have to walk....

It also depends on your mind-frame. Driving home at 30, sensibly, may be safe (stupid but safe) but some people simply can't resist a challenge.

The more worrying trend is the volume of people who drive with excess drugs or a cocktail of them, in their blood. The trouble is that sometimes, there is evidence of appalling driving (stopping in the first lane of the motorway or having two consecutive collisions, for example) where Police breathalise and the person is over the limit - but not horrendously so - so they don't go on to take blood to test for drugs which might explain why the driving is so appalling.

The only truly safe way is no alcohol. Many fall foul of the night before and simply don't realise.

[matchmaker]

Lotobear said:

Here's a related, and hypothetical, conundrum I've often thought about - I live close to the Scottish border but on the English side

I have a pint in a country pub on the English side which places me within the limit in England but just over in Scotland. On the way home I wander over onto the Scottish side (only the main cross border routes are marked at the border). I get nabbed by Scottish plod and am over the limit for Scotland but would have passed a test in England.

Does the ensuing ban apply to my driving anywhere in the UK?

(not going to do this obviously just interested!)

Yes.

[anonymous-user]

I think the law is fine as is.

- Too tight a limit catches the innocent, and would be the final nail in the coffin for British pubs.
- Drink drivers are gonna drive, regardless of the limit, and usually way-over, so decreasing the limit only penalises the innocent.
- Any decrease in the limit makes the morning after even more confusing!

We should be left with some personal discretion in an ever incresingly legislated world ("ban it!" "ban them", "jail them!" etc etc)

. e.g. I go to the pub often at lunch time and have a pint. I then drive home 1 mile in the country side. Sometimes I'll meet someone in town 6 miles away and have lunch with a pint. No problems at all. However, if I'm driving a long journey / motorway, I would never have a pint as it would make me drowsy after about half an hour. It's our choice, and I value that.

[Muzzer79]

I am properly paranoid about getting caught unawares for DD.

I don't drink on a night out if I'm driving but, despite not drinking spirits or wine; only beer, I'm wary of the morning after.

This despite me doing breathalyser training for work where we were shown examples of needing a proper skinful to still blow over the limit in the morning.

I guess I'm happy with the limit the way it is. 0% is un-policeable. Those who intentionally drive when knowingly over the limit deserve everything they get.

What we need is an accurate, reliable way of measuring your intoxication level so those who are unwittingly over the limit can take necessary action not to drive.

[douglasb]

kambites said:

J4CKO said:

Anyone tried the breath testers you can buy ?

Someone bought one to our department BBQ once... after probably about 8 or 9 pints it told me I was safe to drive.

The accuracy of these testers is very much linked to the price and the technology it uses. Fuel cell sensors are the most accurate and most expensive. You're looking at over £100 for fuel cell. Semiconductor is the second best option and prices of reasonable ones start at about £50.

Other pointers as to how likely they are to be reliable is (1) can it be re-calibrated and (2) does it capture a preset volume of breath to analyse? It the answer to either question is "No" it's a toy.

[donkmeister]

I was stopped and breathalysed once. I'd had a half of bitter with my lunch (12 hours before) so knew I was under the limit, however I was wondering "what if the machine is malfunctioning? What if I have a weird metabolism?" etc right up until the machine showed zero and a green light.

I have an alcosense for morning after use, we tried playing with it (following the instructions to wait 20 minutes after drinking etc) and after getting to a level that can only be described as "utterly gazeboed", staggering about, I blew 105. People have been known to claim they werent drinking but must have been spiked at that level of intoxication. It took 2 entire bottles of red wine at 14% abv to get me to that level. 21 units. How many gallons of coke/oj would be required to mask the taste of 21 shots of vodka to the point the imbiber would be unaware? Even half that, or quarter of that?

[Greg the Fish]

Road2Ruin said:

Greg the Fish said:

On a similar note, old farmer chap that used to drink in my old local , PROPER out in the sticks. The entrance to his farm was about 50 metres from the pub but it was a two mile ish private lane to the house. Used to get proper pissed, again, someone must have dobbed because they were waiting by the entrance. He staggered up the road to the entrance and they tried to stop him............until he pointed out to them he was on his private land and, in his own inimitable way, told them to 'f*** off from it' He literally used to bounce of the hedgerows all the way up the lane His old Disco was f****d

Don't try this as it's completely untrue. If the land has public access it's treated the same way as the public highway. For example, if the postman can gain access without your express permission or if you expect people to use your drive as access then it's the public highway and dui applies. There may be areas on the farm however which could be treated as private, but I doubt the drive could.

The lane is entirely private and normally gate is shut.

[Scuba_steve]

Schmed said:

I never drive on any more than one pint. (Of beer, not Scotch!)

A year's ban just isn't worth it. Morning after a night out I probably won't drive either, seen too many get banned this way.

Same. It's extremely rare that I'd drive after a drink as I'm either at home or after a night out I'd be getting a taxi. If i'm out for a meal with my wife I'd have one drink (330ml bottle of Peroni) with a meal and easily leave 2 hours afterwards before driving the car.

I live in Scotland, where the limit is much lower and I know of plenty people who have been stopped the next day after a skinful and have ended up with a ban.

[LuS1fer]

The intoxiliser has safety mechanisms where it has to provide certain readings and the two readings you provide have to be in a certain range and the final self-test has to give the right reading.

The difference between an intoxiliser and a toy is the latter will test breath alcohol or frequently replenished air that you breathe in and out, whereas you have to blow into an intoxiliser until you're blue in the face to get the deep lung air that gives the highest alcohol reading. Blow less and it's a fail.

Also worth bearing in mind that you used to have the option of blood for less than 50 but that went a long time ago. Now, if you're over, that's the reading although i think they give you a "doubt" leeway between 35 (legal limit) and 40.