Is it time to make drink driving zero tolerance?
With the introduction today of a new lower alcohol tolerance in Scotland now making it different to England, is it time to just make drink driving zero tolerance?
1 in 7 deaths on the road are attributable to drink driving.
So what does the reduction in the driving limit from 80mg to 50mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood, actually mean to you?
People process alcohol at different rates, based on age, gender and weight. As it is difficult to be scientific about how an individual processes alcohol due to people’s different physiologies and metabolisms, does this just add confusion to motorists about how much they can drink and be safe to drive within the legal limits?
Might we just as well go for an outright ban?
What are your views on this?
We'd love to hear your comments
Log in to comment
You need to be logged in to interact with Silversurfers. Please use the button below if you already have an account.
LoginNot a member?
You need to be a member to interact with Silversurfers. Joining is free and simple to do. Click the button below to join today!
JoinCommunity Terms & Conditions
Content standards
These content standards apply to any and all material which you contribute to our site (contributions), and to any interactive services associated with it.
You must comply with the spirit of the following standards as well as the letter. The standards apply to each part of any contribution as well as to its whole.
Contributions must:
be accurate (where they state facts); be genuinely held (where they state opinions); and comply with applicable law in the UK and in any country from which they are posted.
Contributions must not:
contain any material which is defamatory of any person; or contain any material which is obscene, offensive, hateful or inflammatory; or promote sexually explicit material; or promote violence; promote discrimination based on race, sex, religion, nationality, disability, sexual orientation or age; or infringe any copyright, database right or trade mark of any other person; or be likely to deceive any person; or be made in breach of any legal duty owed to a third party, such as a contractual duty or a duty of confidence; or promote any illegal activity; or be threatening, abuse or invade another’s privacy, or cause annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety; or be likely to harass, upset, embarrass, alarm or annoy any other person; or be used to impersonate any person, or to misrepresent your identity or affiliation with any person; or give the impression that they emanate from us, if this is not the case; or advocate, promote or assist any unlawful act such as (by way of example only) copyright infringement or computer misuse.
Nurturing a safe environment
Our Silversurfers community is designed to foster friendships, based on trust, honesty, integrity and loyalty and is underpinned by these values.
We don't tolerate swearing, and reserve the right to remove any posts which we feel may offend others... let's keep it friendly!
Tests for drug impairment are becoming more sophisticated, but are also more complicated. Many people forget, however, that the law doesn't differentiate between legal and illegal drugs in relation to driving while impaired. So drive under the influence of any drug or medicine to the extent that your ability is impaired and you are equally guilty.
My over-arching point is this. The law in relation to drink driving has to be based on levels of impairment, and the decision in Scotland and many other countries is that significant impairment can be present in levels below 80. Hence the reduction; but unless we are arguing for zero impairment in driving ability then we cannot argue for zero levels of alcohol in isolation.
,
When the severity of a sentence makes such a drastic impact on a persons life, this same person or perpetrator will think again on whether the real risk of getting caught is worthwhile taking.
To withdraw a driving licence, when one can still go out and keep on driving without not too much fear of getting caught by an overstretched police force is probable worth taking another chance.
On the other hand a custodial sentence to-day can be likened to a Butlins holiday camp.
Neither of which seem to be a suitable punishment for maiming or killing a person, while under the influence of drink or drugs, even reckless driving when sober is just as dangerous.
Back to basics then, is it a punishment or in to-days parlance leniency and rehabilitation, seems to me it is the latter, and if I'm correct in my thinking, thereby could lie the core of the problem.
Offcourse this needs not be limited to just drink driving, but can be applied across the full broad spectrum of offences and other offending of our civilised community at large...!!!!
Don't look at the problem and it effect, rather look at the precipitation...hope there are some members of parliament on this forum.....if so take heed, and do something about it...!!!!!
Filing my patent, now! 😉
I think this is a great idea, if they are stopped and claim they were in any doubt over whether they were above the limit, questions can be asked as to why they didn't use their own breathaliser before taking other citizens lives into their hands.