Safe Speed Forums

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/i-drank-and-drove-home-from-late-late-says-gay-1801757.html



Done it regularly, brushes it off as "just one of those things" and this chap is SUPPOSED to be the champion of road safety in Ireland. He's always on the radio and on tv telling you to "slow down, be safe" and he says he constantly drink drives. Another article in the same paper points out the road deaths this year and the breakdown, with most occurring Saturday night and between 9pm and 8am, and the message again is slow down, not don't drink and drive, make sure you have enough energy, no there clearly ok to do as long as your going slowly.

Before anyone asks I tried to contact them numerous times this year with help on my project, they got back to me once (after 3 weeks) and ignored the rest. Interestingly there was a stat on their website which said "23% of all road deaths are speed related", when I quizzed them on this stat and why their advertisements claim 40% they didn't get back to me but removed the 23% from there website.

No. He says he used to drink/drive but has seen the error of his ways and is trying to convert others. Seems very sensible of him.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

My dad used to drink drive, very slowly through the back streets. He wouldn't dream of doing it today.

It was just the done thing in those days.

Although I do wonder if it's prevelence has increased or decreased. I bet the real answer to that would surprise us all.

I remember Gay Byrne's interview of Johnathan Miller who completely trashed the religious argument like I have never seen before - back in circa 91?

Even Richard Dawkins, another shining star of reason, has never equaled Johnathan's interveiw of that day!!!

Gay Byrne was a good interviewer, the Irish equiv of Parkinson, and cut Johnathan a lot of slack, to his credit, especially given the Catholic audience and his own Catholic stance!

Oh how I wish I could find that interview...

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

It was not the standard where I lived in 1980. We were all very aware of drink drive limits. I think two pints was the accepted maximum to drive. That is lower today. probobly one pint.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

I was in London by '84 and I was aware of D/D public info films. Prior to this my fellow college mates who regularly visited wine bars were always chatting about how to get back by taxi or a fellow colleague who never drank and drove !
I find it a total excuse to imply that it was somehow excusable. I DO agree that there SOME that CAN appear to intake more alcohol than 'standard' and be more capable but much more research needs to be done in this area.
The current limits seem to either be ignored as many ARE being caught for D/d it is just not hitting the media much. Certainly latest reports I heard about in Scotland were very high, which is sad.
There is is delicate issues of personal risk and if people perceive their risk to be 'acceptable' they take a chance.
It is only the Gov that try to imply their risk is greater than an individual might perceive, and so encourage and enforce better behaviour for the greater good. It becomes accepted by the public, when the instinctive advantage is genuine, obvious and sensible. Some of the reasons why the cameras don't work, and are not generally perceived as acceptable !

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

The drink driving law suffers from the same failings as the "speeding" laws - the one size fits all fallacy. Some people are as impaired at half the limit as others are at twice the limit. It would be much more meaningful to test the effect of the alcohol on the individual's driving ability rather than the ammount of alcohol consumed.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

For me responsible people should understand that the limit needs to be set at the lower end of the scale.

I might be able to drink 10 pints and pass my driving test, but a large percentage of the population couldn't so I should be adult enough to understand that the limit should reflect this.

Sure it means my enjoyment is spoilt a bit, I can go down the pub and drink 10 pints then drive home, but then most people that drunk 10 pints and then attempt to drive home would probably end up in somebody's front room, in their car.

It's the same with speed limits and gun ownership for me.

Taking this to the extreme: what if a medical condition exists where, or in a certain circumstance (in combination with other factors), one drop of alcohol would cause impairment?

In this case the analogy with speed limits fail. The safe/acceptable speed varies with conditions - the lower end of the scale is variable; this doesn't apply to impairment.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

So you get the old person who is still driving but incapable of exceeding 30MPH, safely, ANYWHERE, without causing mayhem....should all limits be lowered to accomodate him and the like?

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

Lower end of the scale, not the bottom.

Anyway, said person probably shouldn't be driving at all.

I think it does, the lower end of the scale, system wide, is variable, i.e. different people react in different ways.

I've mentioned this before, and my problem with limits in general...

One fraction over and 'you're drunk' one fraction uner and you're fine - off you go.

A fraction over the speed limit and you're dangerous so £60 fine and points, a fraction under and not a problem - off you go.

Except that it is a problem in my eyes because in both cases the punishment is neither fair nor necessarilly representative of what is actually dangerous!

A fairer system, but still by no means perfect, would be something more graduated.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Yes people react in different ways, but the environmental conditions are another factor above those brought by impairment.
Should we fix motorway limits to that which assures safe driving in foggy blizzards with black ice? Of course not, that's why we should (and to some extent do) have variable limits. This obviously cannot apply to your argument (be it right or wrong) of impairment where there is only 1 fixed limit for all drivers at all times and all conditions.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

That kind of research will never get done. If not the question itself, then the possible answers would be so politically incorrect, the question will be avoided entirely.
As unscientific as this is, here goes:
My guess is that there are a bunch of drivers who could drive home safely after six beers - provided they do not have to effectively deal with any surprises. As soon as you factor how badly even the most mildly-inebriated-but-otherwise-good-driver can deal with surprises back into the equation, it's right back to two beers.
I agree, but that test would be much more difficult to design and administer.

It would be more effective for the officer to take the driver's keys, stick them in a mailbox, call the driver a taxi, and make a deal with the taxi company to take a piece off the top for the referral. Like I said before, he might make it home OK, as long as nothing out of the ordinary happens, but any cop stupid enough to take that chance is being reckless.
That's what the majority of suburban and rural officers used to do, before the legal BAC limit went down from .10 to .08.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

Not really. The main problem with that suggestion is that many people would fail when they hadn't touched a drop. And, of course, it is perfectly acceptable to the authorities for you to drive very badly provided that you are stone cold sober (and don't exceed the speed limit)

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

I am inclined to agree

A while back I commented on a exercise performed by the "Nationwide" news programe back in the late 70's

They took a group of people to the TRL and had them perform a range of tasks behind the wheel while plying them with varying quantities of V&O.

The range of ability/performance was staggering.

At the extreams was a young woman who performed poorly when sober and was out of the contest after a single drink. At the other end was a (Clearly seasoned inveterate alcoholic) chap in his 40's who performed pretty well to start off with and whose performance actually improved with intoxication right up untill they stopped testing (by which time he was 3 times over the limit!)

Despite all the claims of carefull scientific analysis the current limits are actually just a number plucked out of the air imposed to make administration and enforcement easier (Just like speed limits mostly)

Personaly I am not that bothererd about people who Drink and drive. I am only bothererd by those who drink, Drive and crash! Since the former outnumber the latter by, Oooh, Half a million to one or so, drinking and driving isnt actually that dangerous in itself.

What is more, Those that DO go on to have serious accidents are almost always donig something else spectacularly bad as well as being legally drunk, The people who drive home carefully dont really feature in the accident statistics. Though they are the most likly to be stopped by suspicious Police and banned! (The ones that have the serious accidents are only ever caught "after" the event!)

Doesnt seem right somehow!

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

There is nights I could have 6 beers and feel grand to drive (never have though), other nights in half a beer has me wrecked

Same here. I got my best time ever on my friend’s TOCA game after three beers. Not quite the same thing, obviously, but nevertheless it’s still requires excellent hand-to-eye co-ordination and reaction time etc. to get a record time.

I’m not trying to make a case for D&D, far from, but if the question is “how do we make our roads safer?” then the answer is surely to address the cause instead of papering over the fault and above all be honest about what is dangerous.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

'Common sense' (the politically correct version of it) might at best, begrudgingly admit the existence of the latter, but since such would be seen as a rare undesirable anomaly, neither the public majority nor the legislative or judicial minority would think themselves wrong in not protecting the latter character from some sort of penal code.
(It may not reek of social eugenics, but I detect a strong note of neo-prohibitionism).
Why do you think the legal blood alcohol limit was lowered?
Why do you think speed limits are on a downward trend?
Why did Candace Lightner oppose the lowering of the American legal BAC from .10 to .08?
I, like most people, am bothered by people who fail to follow the Rules in my sig. Crashing, by definition, is breaking either or both of the first two rules.
Besides neo-prohibitionism, we are also being conditioned to accept invasions of privacy, with sobriety checkpoints.

For the majority of the population, however, I stand by my educated guess, that a significant number of people who can otherwise drive very well, could mostly continue to drive well while legally inebriated; excepting their ability to deal with the unexpected, which I suspect is probably the first thing to go upon drinking, for the majority of people anyway.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation