Swann in drink drive arrest

[GotSpin]

Tough ****. You want to drive, don't drink, it's as simple as that.

One or two beers isn't going to effect your ability to drive.

 

[GotSpin]

Haha, I was trying hard not to put that idea across.

I only very rarely drink to get drunk, but drinking with the aim of not getting drunk seems rather bizarre to me. Why not drink non-alcoholic beer or something?

So you're not allowed to have a relaxing beer after working day. Not everyone likes soft drink.

 

[andyc]

Whoosh?

 

[Matt79]

But Got Spin, you keep on saying "so you can't have A beer" or "so one too many SIPS of LIGHT beer" (my emphasis added). The legal limit in most states of Australia is 0.05%, which was arrived at as a reasonable compromise between when a measurable effect could be demonstrated and allowing people to have one drink. There's no way ONE beer, or a few sips of light beer will get you over .05. If you're planning to have more than one glass of wine with dinner, or one beer after work, don't drive - it's a remarkably simple idea.

 

[GotSpin]

But Got Spin, you keep on saying "so you can't have A beer" or "so one too many SIPS of LIGHT beer" (my emphasis added). The legal limit in most states of Australia is 0.05%, which was arrived at as a reasonable compromise between when a measurable effect could be demonstrated and allowing people to have one drink. There's no way ONE beer, or a few sips of light beer will get you over .05. If you're planning to have more than one glass of wine with dinner, or one beer after work, don't drive - it's a remarkably simple idea.

My problem is with the idea that you should be slammed with prison sentences and records for straying over the designated % mark. Obviously if someone blows it by a long way they should be heavily punished but otherwise I disagree. If it's generally agreed that driving abilities aren't hindered by one or two drinks over an evening I don't see the problem. I think it'd be a major issue when going over .05 means an automatic criminal record though.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Its like the 15% whatever chucking debate all over again, only certain people seemed to have made a U turn conveniently.

 

[vic_orthdox]

My problem is with the idea that you should be slammed with prison sentences and records for straying over the designated % mark. Obviously if someone blows it by a long way they should be heavily punished but otherwise I disagree. If it's generally agreed that driving abilities aren't hindered by one or two drinks over an evening I don't see the problem. I think it'd be a major issue when going over .05 means an automatic criminal record though.

If you are pulled over, and blow above .05, you have a blood test in the next hour. So you've still got time to lose .01%. Thus, you have to generally be fairly well over to get stitched.

 

[four_or_six]

Can you imagine how you would feel if you were in a car crash where someone was killed and then you were over the legal limit? Even if you want to be purely selfish about it, surely it's not worth living with that for the rest of your life?

 

[GotSpin]

Can you imagine how you would feel if you were in a car crash where someone was killed and then you were over the legal limit? Even if you want to be purely selfish about it, surely it's not worth living with that for the rest of your life?

Obviously if you're over the limit and are involved in a serious accident you should be punished to the full extent of the law.

My argument is not about selfishness, its just against this idea that if caught over the limit, no matter to what degree, you should have the book thrown at you for what could have been an extra beer or glass of wine during the night which would probably not effect your ability to drive.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Obviously if you're over the limit and are involved in a serious accident you should be punished to the full extent of the law.

My argument is not about selfishness, its just against this idea that if caught over the limit, no matter to what degree, you should have the book thrown at you for what could have been an extra beer or glass of wine during the night which would probably not effect your ability to drive.

Unless they've picked an arbitrary number as the cut off, you're very very likely to not be in a fit state to drive safely if over the limit.

 

[four_or_six]

Obviously if you're over the limit and are involved in a serious accident you should be punished to the full extent of the law.

My argument is not about selfishness, its just against this idea that if caught over the limit, no matter to what degree, you should have the book thrown at you for what could have been an extra beer or glass of wine during the night which would probably not effect your ability to drive.

The point is that it is a scientifically proven fact that it does affect your ability to drive. Anyone who is over the limit should get a driving ban IMO, give them time to get their priorites straight.

 

[GotSpin]

The point is that it is a scientifically proven fact that it does affect your ability to drive. Anyone who is over the limit should get a driving ban IMO, give them time to get their priorites straight.

I don't drive tbh but I don't think that extra bit of alcohol that pushes them over the limit will suddenly make drivers complete liabilities on the road.

 

[Streetwise]

I don't drive tbh but I don't think that extra bit of alcohol that pushes them over the limit will suddenly make drivers complete liabilities on the road.

Try explaining that to someone who has lost a family member because someone didnt think their driving was impaired by alcohol.

 

[Furball]

Try explaining that to someone who has lost a family member because someone didnt think their driving was impaired by alcohol.

Bingo.

 

[Matt79]

I don't drive tbh but I don't think that extra bit of alcohol that pushes them over the limit will suddenly make drivers complete liabilities on the road.

second bingo

 

[slowfinger]

Try explaining that to someone who has lost a family member because someone didnt think their driving was impaired by alcohol.

Really streetwise.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Plonker.

Nothing else needs to be said.

 

[Uppercut]

I don't drive tbh but I don't think that extra bit of alcohol that pushes them over the limit will suddenly make drivers complete liabilities on the road.

You think not? Because there's a huge body of scientific evidence that says it will.

 

[GotSpin]

I'm not advocating that people should go out and get blind or even down a six pack then drive straight home.

I am, however, arguing that when the blood alcohol level is breached by a small percentage that the criminal book shouldn't be thrown at the driver. Don't misconstrue this as me believing that drink driving is fine or that there should be no penalty. But i think jail time for a small breach is beyond necessary. This is purely a disagreement based on legal terms

 

[G.I.Joe]

Do you also think jail time for paedophilia is unnecessary if the younger party happens to be just a couple of days below the legal age of consent?