New Lower England/Wales Drink Drive Limit
Discussion
https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/367544/none-roa...
Does nobody in govt look at evidence before making laws? They have the perfect experiment over the border in Scotland. Same driving laws, same road system, etc.
And the result? Lower limit brought no reduction in accidents. Who knew? It isn't drivers with one pint in them that crash it's drunk drivers.
" Whatever methodology they used, the policy seemed to have no effect. When they drilled down into the data and looked only at young male drivers, or compared urban to rural areas, or looked at slight, serious or fatal collisions, the answer was always the same: the lower limit was not associated with a decline in road traffic accidents. "
"All of this suggests that there was never much of an issue with people driving after consuming a single drink. The real problem is with people having a skinful before getting behind the wheel – a more difficult problem to solve. It requires hard work, money and police resources. "
https://www.cityam.com/from-scotland-with-love-ind...
Does nobody in govt look at evidence before making laws? They have the perfect experiment over the border in Scotland. Same driving laws, same road system, etc.
And the result? Lower limit brought no reduction in accidents. Who knew? It isn't drivers with one pint in them that crash it's drunk drivers.
" Whatever methodology they used, the policy seemed to have no effect. When they drilled down into the data and looked only at young male drivers, or compared urban to rural areas, or looked at slight, serious or fatal collisions, the answer was always the same: the lower limit was not associated with a decline in road traffic accidents. "
"All of this suggests that there was never much of an issue with people driving after consuming a single drink. The real problem is with people having a skinful before getting behind the wheel – a more difficult problem to solve. It requires hard work, money and police resources. "
https://www.cityam.com/from-scotland-with-love-ind...
And it punishes those who may go out for a drive, ride, hike, etc. Have one pint at the end at a nice pub with a meal which would be under now but the new rules make them over. All it will do is reduce trade for hospitality. Won't actually make things safer. The ones who will get bladdered and drive still will.
OP is so poorly informed it's not funny.
The article he quotes supports none of the nonsense.
0.05 BAC is normal for most countries.
Also he's remarkably ignorant about what happens. It's been the case ever since I've been in the UK that if you're stopped for a BAC over 0.05 or sometimes lower at the coppers discretion that you'll see the inside of a court and likely a ban.
To contrast with Australia, specifically Western Australia, under 0.05 BAC and nothing. You could blow 0.04999 and not a sausage. 0.05 to 0.08 and it was a fine and 3 demerit points when I left. Pretty sure it's still similar.
However the real issue here is not laws or penalties but enforcement. Your chances of being caught are minimal because the police don't have the number or budget to be patrolling at 11 pm on a Thursday outside of popular areas. Back in Australia I was stopped 3-4 times a year for an RBT (Random Breath Test). I over 10 years of drivin in the UK do you know how many times I've been breathalysed?
Not even once.
I've only been pulled over once and I'm pretty sure that was 80% of a rozzer being bored (it was the middle of the pandemic) and he let me off with a bit of a telling off for going too fast.
So if no changes to statistics it's far more likely to be the fact that enforcement is so lax. No random breath tests and I've never even heard of a Booze Bus in this country.
OTOH, generally most British drivers don't drink drive, especially on a regular basis so there is that argument for lax enforcement. Will an increase in enforcement be worth the money?
However unlike the OP I read the article and it was heavily focused on repeat offenders. I've got a small pang of sympathy for someone who gets done for 0.06 BAC once... Twice no sympathy, three times and you're clearly thumbing your nose at the law and give zero f
ks about anyone else.
The article he quotes supports none of the nonsense.
0.05 BAC is normal for most countries.
Also he's remarkably ignorant about what happens. It's been the case ever since I've been in the UK that if you're stopped for a BAC over 0.05 or sometimes lower at the coppers discretion that you'll see the inside of a court and likely a ban.
To contrast with Australia, specifically Western Australia, under 0.05 BAC and nothing. You could blow 0.04999 and not a sausage. 0.05 to 0.08 and it was a fine and 3 demerit points when I left. Pretty sure it's still similar.
However the real issue here is not laws or penalties but enforcement. Your chances of being caught are minimal because the police don't have the number or budget to be patrolling at 11 pm on a Thursday outside of popular areas. Back in Australia I was stopped 3-4 times a year for an RBT (Random Breath Test). I over 10 years of drivin in the UK do you know how many times I've been breathalysed?
Not even once.
I've only been pulled over once and I'm pretty sure that was 80% of a rozzer being bored (it was the middle of the pandemic) and he let me off with a bit of a telling off for going too fast.
So if no changes to statistics it's far more likely to be the fact that enforcement is so lax. No random breath tests and I've never even heard of a Booze Bus in this country.
OTOH, generally most British drivers don't drink drive, especially on a regular basis so there is that argument for lax enforcement. Will an increase in enforcement be worth the money?
However unlike the OP I read the article and it was heavily focused on repeat offenders. I've got a small pang of sympathy for someone who gets done for 0.06 BAC once... Twice no sympathy, three times and you're clearly thumbing your nose at the law and give zero f
ks about anyone else. captain_cynic said:
OP is so poorly informed it's not funny.
The article he quotes supports none of the nonsense.
0.05 BAC is normal for most countries.
Also he's remarkably ignorant about what happens. It's been the case ever since I've been in the UK that if you're stopped for a BAC over 0.05 or sometimes lower at the coppers discretion that you'll see the inside of a court and likely a ban
Poorly informed? Look in a mirror. If you are stopped i England with a BAC of 0.05 you are driving legally.The article he quotes supports none of the nonsense.
0.05 BAC is normal for most countries.
Also he's remarkably ignorant about what happens. It's been the case ever since I've been in the UK that if you're stopped for a BAC over 0.05 or sometimes lower at the coppers discretion that you'll see the inside of a court and likely a ban
England BAC limit is 0.08 not 0.05.
https://www.gov.uk/drink-drive-limit
Read the article? The article shows that reducing the limit did not reduce accidents. It isn't complicated.
Edited by irc on Wednesday 13th August 11:10
Yes no evidence reduced accidents in Scotland.
https://www.ias.org.uk/2021/08/25/none-for-the-roa...
Main affect will be on country pubs, where people have a pint with their meal, and probably people being picked up after the night before when they still have some traces in their system.
Typical Starmer measure of being seen to do something, regardless of the consequences, even when they know it won't help.
https://www.ias.org.uk/2021/08/25/none-for-the-roa...
Main affect will be on country pubs, where people have a pint with their meal, and probably people being picked up after the night before when they still have some traces in their system.
Typical Starmer measure of being seen to do something, regardless of the consequences, even when they know it won't help.
I only ever got breathalysed once in 1986. I left my Mini's manual aftermarket reverse light on by mistake when leaving the pub carpark!
As mentioned above, the chances of being pulled & caught are extremely low, especially out here in the sticks. I can't really see it making any difference at all to road safety.
As mentioned above, the chances of being pulled & caught are extremely low, especially out here in the sticks. I can't really see it making any difference at all to road safety.
JagLover said:
Yes no evidence reduced accidents in Scotland.
https://www.ias.org.uk/2021/08/25/none-for-the-roa...
Main affect will be on country pubs, where people have a pint with their meal, and probably people being picked up after the night before when they still have some traces in their system.
Typical Starmer measure of being seen to do something, regardless of the consequences, even when they know it won't help.
It’s worse than that, he’s introduced a policy that has been shown to have no effect in practice, will criminalise a load of people who presented no significantly increased risk to other road users and has handed the SNP an open goal 9 months before a Scottish Parliamentary election. Even just from the political aspect it’s a completely brain-dead thing to do. I’m mystified as to what motivated this within the UK government/Labour party. Watch for some kind of SNP election ad pointing out that this was introduced in Scotland first.https://www.ias.org.uk/2021/08/25/none-for-the-roa...
Main affect will be on country pubs, where people have a pint with their meal, and probably people being picked up after the night before when they still have some traces in their system.
Typical Starmer measure of being seen to do something, regardless of the consequences, even when they know it won't help.
Totally agree with the sentiment that the vast majority people aren't impaired after one or two drinks. People getting leathered and driving, the rule change wont matter one bit.
I wouldnt be surprised if morning after drug traces are a massive contributor to the stats as I believe the tolerance on illegal drugs are very low.
I wouldnt be surprised if morning after drug traces are a massive contributor to the stats as I believe the tolerance on illegal drugs are very low.
irc said:
captain_cynic said:
OP is so poorly informed it's not funny.
The article he quotes supports none of the nonsense.
0.05 BAC is normal for most countries.
Also he's remarkably ignorant about what happens. It's been the case ever since I've been in the UK that if you're stopped for a BAC over 0.05 or sometimes lower at the coppers discretion that you'll see the inside of a court and likely a ban
Poorly informed? Look in a mirror. If you are stopped i England with a BAC of 0.05 you are driving legally.The article he quotes supports none of the nonsense.
0.05 BAC is normal for most countries.
Also he's remarkably ignorant about what happens. It's been the case ever since I've been in the UK that if you're stopped for a BAC over 0.05 or sometimes lower at the coppers discretion that you'll see the inside of a court and likely a ban
England BAC limit is 0.08 not 0.05.
https://www.gov.uk/drink-drive-limit
Read the article? The article shows that reducing the limit did not reduce accidents. It isn't complicated.
Edited by irc on Wednesday 13th August 11:10
Jag_NE said:
Totally agree with the sentiment that the vast majority people aren't impaired after one or two drinks.
Sentiment is pointless. Evidence (over several decades, in multiple countries) has shown that 0.08 BAC comes with significantly higher risk than 0.05. That's why most industrialised countries have a 0.05 limit. England is very much an outlier on this.The point about Australia is that it's a place with actual enforcement and enforcement is what makes the crucial difference. The national attitude in Australia around drink-driving is vastly different to England because both the likelihood and consequences of getting caught are greater.
More generally the lack of awareness in the UK around drink driving is shocking. But again it's down to a lack of government action - no education or awareness campaigns around managing blood-alcohol levels; just the occasional advert to say don't drink at all. Along with a lack of enforcement, those factors combined with a high 0.08 BAC limit is a crazy situation.
captain_cynic said:
OP is so poorly informed it's not funny.
The article he quotes supports none of the nonsense.
0.05 BAC is normal for most countries.
Also he's remarkably ignorant about what happens. It's been the case ever since I've been in the UK that if you're stopped for a BAC over 0.05 or sometimes lower at the coppers discretion that you'll see the inside of a court and likely a ban.
To contrast with Australia, specifically Western Australia, under 0.05 BAC and nothing. You could blow 0.04999 and not a sausage. 0.05 to 0.08 and it was a fine and 3 demerit points when I left. Pretty sure it's still similar.
However the real issue here is not laws or penalties but enforcement. Your chances of being caught are minimal because the police don't have the number or budget to be patrolling at 11 pm on a Thursday outside of popular areas. Back in Australia I was stopped 3-4 times a year for an RBT (Random Breath Test). I over 10 years of drivin in the UK do you know how many times I've been breathalysed?
Not even once.
I've only been pulled over once and I'm pretty sure that was 80% of a rozzer being bored (it was the middle of the pandemic) and he let me off with a bit of a telling off for going too fast.
So if no changes to statistics it's far more likely to be the fact that enforcement is so lax. No random breath tests and I've never even heard of a Booze Bus in this country.
OTOH, generally most British drivers don't drink drive, especially on a regular basis so there is that argument for lax enforcement. Will an increase in enforcement be worth the money?
However unlike the OP I read the article and it was heavily focused on repeat offenders. I've got a small pang of sympathy for someone who gets done for 0.06 BAC once... Twice no sympathy, three times and you're clearly thumbing your nose at the law and give zero fks about anyone else.
Do you have any examples of anyone being done for 0.06? As that sounds like absolute nonsense to me. The article he quotes supports none of the nonsense.
0.05 BAC is normal for most countries.
Also he's remarkably ignorant about what happens. It's been the case ever since I've been in the UK that if you're stopped for a BAC over 0.05 or sometimes lower at the coppers discretion that you'll see the inside of a court and likely a ban.
To contrast with Australia, specifically Western Australia, under 0.05 BAC and nothing. You could blow 0.04999 and not a sausage. 0.05 to 0.08 and it was a fine and 3 demerit points when I left. Pretty sure it's still similar.
However the real issue here is not laws or penalties but enforcement. Your chances of being caught are minimal because the police don't have the number or budget to be patrolling at 11 pm on a Thursday outside of popular areas. Back in Australia I was stopped 3-4 times a year for an RBT (Random Breath Test). I over 10 years of drivin in the UK do you know how many times I've been breathalysed?
Not even once.
I've only been pulled over once and I'm pretty sure that was 80% of a rozzer being bored (it was the middle of the pandemic) and he let me off with a bit of a telling off for going too fast.
So if no changes to statistics it's far more likely to be the fact that enforcement is so lax. No random breath tests and I've never even heard of a Booze Bus in this country.
OTOH, generally most British drivers don't drink drive, especially on a regular basis so there is that argument for lax enforcement. Will an increase in enforcement be worth the money?
However unlike the OP I read the article and it was heavily focused on repeat offenders. I've got a small pang of sympathy for someone who gets done for 0.06 BAC once... Twice no sympathy, three times and you're clearly thumbing your nose at the law and give zero f
ks about anyone else. Not quite as nonsensical as reducing the DD limit for no apparent benefit, but nonsense all the same.
captain_cynic said:
OP is so poorly informed it's not funny.
The article he quotes supports none of the nonsense.
0.05 BAC is normal for most countries.
Also he's remarkably ignorant about what happens. It's been the case ever since I've been in the UK that if you're stopped for a BAC over 0.05 or sometimes lower at the coppers discretion that you'll see the inside of a court and likely a ban.
To contrast with Australia, specifically Western Australia, under 0.05 BAC and nothing. You could blow 0.04999 and not a sausage. 0.05 to 0.08 and it was a fine and 3 demerit points when I left. Pretty sure it's still similar.
However the real issue here is not laws or penalties but enforcement. Your chances of being caught are minimal because the police don't have the number or budget to be patrolling at 11 pm on a Thursday outside of popular areas. Back in Australia I was stopped 3-4 times a year for an RBT (Random Breath Test). I over 10 years of drivin in the UK do you know how many times I've been breathalysed?
Not even once.
I've only been pulled over once and I'm pretty sure that was 80% of a rozzer being bored (it was the middle of the pandemic) and he let me off with a bit of a telling off for going too fast.
So if no changes to statistics it's far more likely to be the fact that enforcement is so lax. No random breath tests and I've never even heard of a Booze Bus in this country.
OTOH, generally most British drivers don't drink drive, especially on a regular basis so there is that argument for lax enforcement. Will an increase in enforcement be worth the money?
However unlike the OP I read the article and it was heavily focused on repeat offenders. I've got a small pang of sympathy for someone who gets done for 0.06 BAC once... Twice no sympathy, three times and you're clearly thumbing your nose at the law and give zero fks about anyone else.
Have you been drinking? The article he quotes supports none of the nonsense.
0.05 BAC is normal for most countries.
Also he's remarkably ignorant about what happens. It's been the case ever since I've been in the UK that if you're stopped for a BAC over 0.05 or sometimes lower at the coppers discretion that you'll see the inside of a court and likely a ban.
To contrast with Australia, specifically Western Australia, under 0.05 BAC and nothing. You could blow 0.04999 and not a sausage. 0.05 to 0.08 and it was a fine and 3 demerit points when I left. Pretty sure it's still similar.
However the real issue here is not laws or penalties but enforcement. Your chances of being caught are minimal because the police don't have the number or budget to be patrolling at 11 pm on a Thursday outside of popular areas. Back in Australia I was stopped 3-4 times a year for an RBT (Random Breath Test). I over 10 years of drivin in the UK do you know how many times I've been breathalysed?
Not even once.
I've only been pulled over once and I'm pretty sure that was 80% of a rozzer being bored (it was the middle of the pandemic) and he let me off with a bit of a telling off for going too fast.
So if no changes to statistics it's far more likely to be the fact that enforcement is so lax. No random breath tests and I've never even heard of a Booze Bus in this country.
OTOH, generally most British drivers don't drink drive, especially on a regular basis so there is that argument for lax enforcement. Will an increase in enforcement be worth the money?
However unlike the OP I read the article and it was heavily focused on repeat offenders. I've got a small pang of sympathy for someone who gets done for 0.06 BAC once... Twice no sympathy, three times and you're clearly thumbing your nose at the law and give zero f
ks about anyone else. Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff