No I am not and not sure how many. Its been said for as long as I can remember DON'T DRINK AND DRIVE. !!!!
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[News] Drink driving - why?
- Thread starter Buzzer
- Start date
No I am not and not sure how many. Its been said for as long as I can remember DON'T DRINK AND DRIVE. !!!!
BensGrandad
New member
I do not.
What, even water?
mejonaNO12 aka riskit
Well-known member
So how many HOURS do you believe should be left for every pint consumed. It's not as simple as you make out.
None of this "don't drink the day before". Actual clear guidelines.
I have no idea on how many hours until your sober, or there is zero alcohol in your system, I'm sure there are people very well paid who could work out times amounts etc for all of us to know where we stand. They should also be 100% correct working breath test that a person could do to know where they stand.
However, if it was zero as in zero then it would make life a lot clearer.
Arthritic Toe
Well-known member
If you've ever had a drink in your life (or used mouthwash) then there is never a point at which its zero. It's one of those things where it approaches zero without ever getting there. Its called an asymptote in geometry. It does of course get to a level where it is so small that it becomes unmeasurable.
However, by your argument, if you have ever had a drink in your life, you must never drive again.
BensGrandad
New member
An efficient 100% accurate home breathalyser should be available with it stipulated that having passed it would no be acceptable as defence evidence.as obviously somebody could get their young child to blow in it but it should be available as guidance.
BensGrandad
New member
I think the zero reading is being stated as whatever the standard measuring appliance shows as zero, at least it does in my estimation. Like the lee way on speeding there could be a minimal tolerance which would not entail prosecution.
- Jul 7, 2003
- 47,221
No you're not.
There used to be a statutory option whereby somebody who blew between 40 and 50 were offered the option to have blood taken and analysed, which of course anybody in their right mind did, in the hope that by the time this was done, the alcohol levels in your system had dropped below the limits. That measure was scrapped a about three years ago because the evidential breath machines now are deemed sufficiently accurate that the margin for error is so small, somebody who produced a result of 40 would quite clearly have been over the limit.
happypig
Staring at the rude boys
I apologise and stand (well, sit) corrected.
- Jul 7, 2003
- 47,221
You can buy kits online now, but those will never, ever, ever be admissible as evidence. What would be the point? If somebody blows a reading of, say, 29ug of alcohol in one of those, when the legal limit is 35, they might think "yeah, I'm good: let's drive". When in reality I would suggest that they were in no fit state at that stage, regardless of any legal limit.
BensGrandad
New member
Being in the front line what is your personnal view of a zero level, not general police view should you differ.
Arthritic Toe
Well-known member
Exactly! - that's what we have now with the existing law. Its set at 35 micrograms.
BensGrandad
New member
Are they guaranteed to be as accurate as official tests?
darkwolf666
Well-known member
Zero, as in zero? What about some medications with a very small amount of alcohol in them. Don't drink and dose?
What about those with auto-brewery syndrome, they would never be allowed to drive!
darkwolf666
Well-known member
There is no official Lee-way on speeding.
Arthritic Toe
Well-known member
Good point - well made.
BensGrandad
New member
That is not zero as has been advocated I was thinking more like zero but not acting under 5 micrograms which is hardly any drink I would think.
- Jul 7, 2003
- 47,221
Unfortunately, [MENTION=5200]Buzzer[/MENTION], we have the joint highest permissible alcohol levels in mainland Europe. Most countries in the EU, as well as Scotland now, have a limit of 20 micrograms of alcohol per 100ml of breath. Here, and in I think only a couple of other places, it's 35.
It's a poor show. I personally disagree with the limit being zero, as there would be far too many arguments against, and the courts would end up being occupied with the specialist defence solicitors accessible largely to the rich, clogging up the system with ludicrous technical arguments to try and get their clients off seemingly cut & dried cases. They do this anyway of course- I wouldn't mind betting that if Ant McPartlin is charged, he'll have somebody like Nick Freeman or Phil Lucas claiming that, despite him being whatever it might turn out to be over the limit, it's all invalid because the police officer spelled his name slightly wrong, or didn't have her hat on when she arrested him, or because he secretly and without thinking ate a Haribo Gold Bear that he found in his pocket in between being arrested and breathalysed. But we should without doubt at least fall into line with the rest of Europe.
BensGrandad
New member
No there isnt and one Chief Constable wanted to act on 1 mph over the limit but was shouted down by his fellow officers as it being impractical.