scotland to reduce Drink Drive limit

scotland to reduce Drink Drive limit

Author
Discussion

simoid

19,772 posts

157 months

Monday 12th January 2015
quotequote all
Speeding as in going too fast, or exceeding the speed limit?

rover 623gsi

5,230 posts

160 months

Monday 12th January 2015
quotequote all
http://www.rospa.com/faqs/detail.aspx?faq=296

2012

Speeding
Around 400 people a year are killed in crashes in which someone exceeds the speed limit or drives too fast for the conditions.

Drink Driving
Around 280 people die a year in crashes in which someone was over the legal drink drive limit.

Seat Belt Wearing
Around 200 lives each year could be saved if everyone always wore their seat belt.

Careless Driving
More than 300 deaths a year involve someone being "careless, reckless or in a hurry", and a further 120 involve "aggressive driving".

At-work
Around one third of fatal and serious road crashes involve someone who was at work.

Inexperience
More than 400 people are killed in crashes involving young car drivers aged 17 to 24 years, every year, including over 150 young drivers, 90 passengers and more than 170 other road users.

simoid

19,772 posts

157 months

Monday 12th January 2015
quotequote all
Ah cool, thanks for posting the source link.

Did you perhaps slightly misrepresent by saying "attributed to"? smile

turbobloke

103,742 posts

259 months

Monday 12th January 2015
quotequote all
RoSPA said:
Speeding
Around 400 people a year are killed in crashes in which someone exceeds the speed limit or drives too fast for the conditions.
Firstly, their heading 'speeding' is inapplicable to the total as expressed, since driving too fast for the conditions can and may well be within the speed limit.

Secondly, exceeding the speed limit cannot be assumed always to be a causal factor in an accident, whereas driving too fast for the conditions is very likely to be. As a result, the speed limit violation accidents may not have had vehicle speed as a causal factor, and therefore the total of 400 is misleading under the heading 'speeding'.

For 2013, wider data puts the speed total at under 300. Whatever the totals are, they'll always be too high, but reducing road deaths without an infinite budget and avoiding draconian measures will involve getting the priorities right.

DfT data has long shown that loss of control is the biggest single factor at 43% (excessive speed accounts for 40% of those which translates to 17%) and after that, the most common causal factor of fatal or serious injury accidents was "pedestrians entering the carriageway without due care". This is followed by drivers "failing to avoid vehicle or object", "failing to give way" or "executing a poor turn or manoeuvre".

Impairment through alcohol has been around the eighth most frequently reported contributory factor in fatacs.

rover 623gsi

5,230 posts

160 months

Monday 12th January 2015
quotequote all
i was just trying to paraphrase to save me typing loads

Either way – the stats show that Britain’s roads are relatively safe. And I can say that despite having lost close family members in road accidents.

The thing about falling numbers of fatalities is that it becomes proportionally more difficult to reduce numbers further – law of diminishing returns and all that. I’m not sure there is anything that can be done that would cause a major reduction in accidents (and the effects of those accidents). All we’re going to manage now is a trickle of improvements. 1% here and there.

Of the 280 drink-driving related deaths in 2012 it would be interesting to know how far over the existing limit the drivers were (and how many were over the new limit in Scotland).

Sticks.

8,707 posts

250 months

Monday 12th January 2015
quotequote all
Interesting info, thank you. But if you're looking at the number of deaths alone, you'd have to factor in the increasing safety (and size perhaps) of modern cars - many more accidents being surviveable than they once were - and the proportion of the change which was due to that.

I wonder whether there will be a figure for the number of deaths/accidents/arrests between the old limit and the new just to show how effective this policy is.

Probably not, in case it doesn't support the argument.



Not-The-Messiah

3,611 posts

80 months

Tuesday 1st May 2018
quotequote all
Was listening to radio today and they mentioned the new minimum price for alcohol and the spokesperson said that it will save X amount of lives and stop X amount of crime's.

And thought when else did the Scottish government do something similar and promise similar?

So did a quick bit of research on the 2014 lowering of the drink drive limit and it's affects.

Which wasn't to easy to be fair, plenty of info on 2015 were there was a drop in road deaths from 181 to 157 in Scotland. With eveyone claiming it as a massive success for the new limit. Also showing a decrease in people being caught drink driving in 2015.

Then you find the 2016 with very little information about direct involvement with alcohol I wonder why that is?

A increase from 157 in 2015 up to 175 in 2016 which is equal to or higher than the 3 previous years before the lowering of the limit 2011= 175, 2012=162, 2013=159.

Like I said couldn't find any information on direct involvement of alcohol all I could find is that you are still 29% more likely to be killed through drink driving in Scotland than you are in England and Wales.

Also add that 1 in 30 people stopped in Scotland over the Christmas 2017 where over the limit.

So basically by the looks of it it's made ball all of a different. Well apart from banning a good few people from driveing who were between the new and old limit many of whom probably lost jobs and livelihoods. And the big impact on rural pubs.

A great success story just as I think the minimum price on alcohol will be. Scotland really is run by a bunch of authoritarian morons.

Edited by Not-The-Messiah on Wednesday 2nd May 00:30

simoid

19,772 posts

157 months

Tuesday 1st May 2018
quotequote all
Presumably my local MP will be aware of the statistics, or some department somewhere will...

foxbody-87

2,675 posts

165 months

Tuesday 1st May 2018
quotequote all
Not-The-Messiah said:
Was listening to radio today and they mentioned the new minimum price for alcohol and the spokesperson said that it will save X amount of lives and stop X amount of crime's.

And thought when else did the Scottish government do something similar and promise similar?

So did a quick bit of research on the 2014 lowering of the drink drive limit and it's affects.

Which wasn't to easy to be fair, plenty of info on 2015 were there was a drop in road deaths from 181 to 157 in Scotland. With eveyone claiming it as a massive success for the new limit. Also showing a decrease in people being caught drink driving in 2015.

Then you find the 2016 with very little information about direct involvement with alcohol I wonder why that is?

A increase from 157 in 2015 up to 175 in 2016 which is equal to or higher than the 3 previous years before the lowering of the limit 2011= 175, 2012=162, 2013=159.

Like I said couldn't find any information on direct involvement of alcohol all I could find is that you are still 29% more likely to be killed though drink driving in Scotland than you are in England and Wales.

Also add that 1 in 30 people stopped in Scotland over the Christmas 2017 where over the limit.

So basically by the looks of it it's made ball all of a different. Well apart from banning a good few people from driveing who were between the new and old limit many of whom probably lost jobs and livelihoods. And the big impact on rural pubs.

A great success story just as I think the minimum price on alcohol will be. Scotland really is run by a bunch of authoritarian morons.
I’ve just moved to Bonny Scotland, but luckily the nearest English supermarket is only 10 minutes drive for me. I also had to leave my air rifle in England, as I didn’t fancy paying £72 for a licence. I asked my mate to look after it, but his (Scottish) shotgun licence doesn’t cover measly air weapons!

mickytruelove

420 posts

110 months

Tuesday 1st May 2018
quotequote all
all hail nicola sturgeon.

It seems the country is run by shool children that have went to uni and have no real world experience. Its gonna take a while before people realise the SNP and useless and have done nothing good for the country.

Vipers

32,799 posts

227 months

Wednesday 2nd May 2018
quotequote all
mickytruelove said:
all hail nicola sturgeon.

It seems the country is run by shool children that have went to uni and have no real world experience. Its gonna take a while before people realise the SNP and useless and have done nothing good for the country.
Now now, get her name correct its "Nicola ME ME ME Sturgeon", then again she is a sporg, biggrin




r11co

6,244 posts

229 months

Wednesday 2nd May 2018
quotequote all
The minimum alcohol pricing legislation is just another piece of pointless virtue signalling by an SNP government that wants to be seen to be doing something useful while doing nothing at all because generally when they actually try to change things they make them patently and predictably worse.

Offensive Behaviour at Football Act (repealed)

Unified Police Force

Vipers

32,799 posts

227 months

Wednesday 2nd May 2018
quotequote all
Those who really need that bottle of cheepo cider a day, and now paying nearly four times more wont give it up.

They will find another way to sustain their thirst, thieving, mugging, etc etc etc. Sad but I think it will happen.

BlackLabel

13,251 posts

122 months

Thursday 13th December 2018
quotequote all
Reduced drink-drive limit in Scotland has no impact on cutting road accidents.






https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/...

Not-The-Messiah

3,611 posts

80 months

Thursday 13th December 2018
quotequote all
BlackLabel said:
Reduced drink-drive limit in Scotland has no impact on cutting road accidents.






https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/...
Who would have thought it!
I expect to see similar results with regards to the minimum alcohol pricing. Especially with their claims on reduced criminal activity.

Not read the report just the summary but I bet they don't go into the negative results of the change in law?
How many people lost their licence and livelihood and potentially triggered other things like brake up of family's depression and possibly ultimately suicide? All because they got caught between the new limit and old one. Which we now know seems to have had no affect.


Ian974

2,928 posts

198 months

Thursday 13th December 2018
quotequote all
Shockingly enough if someone is going to drink drive, the number on the breathalyzer isn't going to make any difference.
It just means they're recorded as being 5 times over the limit rather than 3.

simoid

19,772 posts

157 months

Thursday 13th December 2018
quotequote all
"The most plausible explanation of our finding is that the new blood alcohol limit was insufficiently enforced, publicised, or both."

Or changing the limit makes fk all difference as anyone who broke 80 will happily break 50 idea

alangla

4,723 posts

180 months

Thursday 13th December 2018
quotequote all
simoid said:
"The most plausible explanation of our finding is that the new blood alcohol limit was insufficiently enforced, publicised, or both."

Or changing the limit makes fk all difference as anyone who broke 80 will happily break 50 idea
It does actually say that -

full quote

Lancet article said:
The most plausible explanation of our finding of no effect of the reduced BAC limit for drivers on RTA outcome is that this limit was insufficiently enforced or publicised or both. A European Union strategy to support member states in reducing alcohol-related harm stated that a key to the success of drink-drive legislation after its introduction is the enforcement of frequent and systematic random breath testing, supported by public education, publicity, and awareness campaigns that involve all stakeholders.
Further, previous research supports an association between increased enforcement and decreased RTAs. Random breath testing is recognised as the principal drink driving law enforcement strategy. Most of the decrease in alcohol-related traffic injuries and fatalities in Australia, for instance, has been attributed to the implementation of random breath tests. There is evidence that enforcement of BAC limits for drivers has reduced in the UK, with English police force data showing 25% fewer breath tests in 2015 compared with 2011. In Scotland, the initial investment in public education and media campaigning at the time of the limit reduction in December, 2014 was not maintained in the subsequent years. Other explanations are, first, that the majority of drink driving RTAs (RTAs caused by drivers with a BAC in excess of the legal limit) might be caused by people who continue to ignore the law under the new legislation, or that people who previously used to drink-drive between the new and old limits have changed their behaviours but are responsible for only a small fraction of all RTAs. Second, it could be that larger effect sizes seen historically for BAC lowering interventions might be more difficult to achieve in an era of improved road safety and where drink driving is increasingly socially unacceptable. Finally, it could be that RTAs that are not related to alcohol have increased in Scotland during the study period, masking an intervention effect; however, given the modelling results, we think this explanation is unlikely. Further research exploring these and other possible explanations for the findings is needed.
Edited by alangla on Thursday 13th December 11:03

irc

7,171 posts

135 months

Thursday 13th December 2018
quotequote all
The SNP govt nanny state minimum alcohol pricing was also a raging success. In the first 6 months consumption went up.

https://velvetgloveironfist.blogspot.com/2018/11/f...

Drumroll

3,738 posts

119 months

Thursday 13th December 2018
quotequote all
DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.
Care to actually link that statement to some actual evidence? Should be easy for you as there is "repeated studies"