Drink-drive teen six times over limit

**Postie** · 15th December 2005, 14:05

from todays herald,

A 16-year-old was today caught six times over the legal drink-driving limit, prompting police to say he was "a fatal accident waiting to happen".

The Tauranga blocklayer was spotted on inner-city security cameras swerving all over the road.

He recorded a reading of 996 mcg breath/alcohol when pulled over on Takitimu Drive at 3.45am.

Strategic traffic unit Senior Sergeant Ian Campion said he was disgusted by the alcohol reading, particularly in someone so young.

Mr Campion said: "One of the reasons the breath and blood alcohol levels are lower for the under-20s is the fact that they don't have the experience or the skills to drive effectively."

"These issues are just exacerbated when you drive drunk."

After consuming that much, the teen would have been slurring his words, completely unsteady on his feet and unable to string sentences together, he said.

"At that point ... they are just a serious injury or fatal crash waiting to happen."

Mr Campion said while the 996mcg reading was at the top end of the scale, it was not unheard of.

"I will be honest with you, throughout the operation we have been running we have had young offenders coming through with breath alcohol levels in the 700, 800 and 900s."

Mr Campion laid some of the responsibility with parents - questioning where teenagers received alcohol from.

Since a concerted Western Bay of Plenty drink-driving campaign kicked off in October, teenage males have emerged as the main offenders.

Of the 202 people charged throughout the campaign so far, 49.4 per cent were aged between 15 and 24.

The statistics also reveal one in every 79 cars on the region's roads is being driven drunk.

Western Bay of Plenty road safety co-ordinator Lynette Hines was dismayed that young people on the roads were ignoring the message not to drink and drive.

"I'm just so disappointed and so frustrated. How can we get to these people?

"It goes in cycles and we're definitely on the downward cycle," she said, noting that she had seen an increase in the number of young teenagers being found drunk in control of a vehicle during the past two months.

She was concerned the teenager would have been a grave danger to the public. "He would have no control at all, poor judgement, no idea of speed," Ms Hines said.

The 16-year-old will be dealt with by Youth Aid and faces maximum penalties of six weeks imprisonment, a $2250 fine and three months disqualification from driving.

**bugjuice** · 15th December 2005, 14:08

chop his arms and legs off. He won't be able to do it again.

3 month ban too? And what did Speedy get? so not right. 6 weeks is toss all, and 2g's? his folks will probably pay it off.. so what's he learnt? And those aren't even convicted. He just faces those 'maximum' penalties..

pfft...

**ManDownUnder** · 15th December 2005, 14:17

put a couple of bags of suger in his fuel tank and send him on his way...

I agree - give the kid a complete and utter bollocking. Car seized and sold, fined, and licence taken off him - minimum 5 year stand down when he has to start his learners over again. Make him work in the morgue for a week over Christmas... make him work on the bodies of the youngins'

Find some way to make him look like a knob in front of his peers and relatives too.

I'd LOVE to be the judge he came up in front of...

**James Deuce** · 15th December 2005, 14:18

You know, we're not allowed to give people shit for riding too fast, too slow, too aggressively (you are allowed to give people shit for being a pussy), about the gear they choose to wear when riding, the type of tyre they use (you are allowed to give people shit if a tyre lasts more than 1500kms), for not attending tracks days, for lane-splitting in a dangerous manner, and for owning a bike that is grossly over-capable for NZ conditions.

So it stands to reason that we shouldn't be giving people shit for choosing to drive under the influence of their drug of choice.

Doesn't it?

**sAsLEX** · 15th December 2005, 14:27

Originally Posted by Jim2

So it stands to reason that we shouldn't be giving people shit for choosing to drive under the influence of their drug of choice.

Doesn't it?

No.........

**Swoop** · 15th December 2005, 14:27

Well done that kid!!!

This is precisely what aunty helen wants. Young kids going out and buying grog (1st tax dollar) and also grog for their even younger mates (more tax $$'s), then they get done for various offences ($$'s of revenue gathered from this as well). The possible impounding and forfeiture of the motorvehicle in question brings in bonus $$'s as well.

and some people wonder why the government lowered the drinking age...

:slap:

**Yokai** · 15th December 2005, 14:53

Originally Posted by Stupid Statistics Department

Of the 202 people charged throughout the campaign so far, 49.4 per cent were aged between 15 and 24.

The statistics also reveal one in every 79 cars on the region's roads is being driven drunk.

AARRGGHH!!!!!

Of the 202 people charged throughout the campaign so far, I'll bet 100% are in charge of some vehicle. I'd ban all vehicles in that case!

OR

Of the 202 people charged throughout the campaign so far, I'll bet 100% are over 14 - therefore give all the under 14s a licence and take it away from all us old farts!

and 1 in 79 cars is being drunk?... Surely that should be 1 in 79 drivers on the regions roads is drunk? Or is it higher (cos what about all the parked cars... )

I hate stupid statistics....

**Grahameeboy** · 15th December 2005, 14:54

I agree a 3 month disqualification does not match the offence when you compare it with speeding...raise the driving age and have a zero for under the influence.....you can legally buy a bike, car whatever which lets you break the law, you can drink and drive as long as it is legal......hallo anybody there!!
Now people will still speed but I reckon that a zero alcohol tolerance will make people think....they do it in other Countries....okay I hear some say that some medicines have alcohol but if it is prescribed that sorts that one out and I am sure that they can calibrate the machine to allow for potential medical content which ain't much in medicine anyway.....

**Da Bird** · 15th December 2005, 15:00

Originally Posted by Postie

from todays herald,

The 16-year-old will be dealt with by Youth Aid and faces maximum penalties of six weeks imprisonment, a $2250 fine and three months disqualification from driving.

With that level, he should have been charged as an adult which is 3 months jail, $4500.00 fine max and minimum 6 months disqualification. Although, being dealt with by Youth Aid, he will probably just get disqualified.

**bugjuice** · 15th December 2005, 15:08

Originally Posted by Jim2

You know, we're not allowed to give people shit for riding too fast, too slow, too aggressively (you are allowed to give people shit for being a pussy), about the gear they choose to wear when riding, the type of tyre they use (you are allowed to give people shit if a tyre lasts more than 1500kms), for not attending tracks days, for lane-splitting in a dangerous manner, and for owning a bike that is grossly over-capable for NZ conditions.

So it stands to reason that we shouldn't be giving people shit for choosing to drive under the influence of their drug of choice.

Doesn't it?

driving under the influence could take out a number of people. Lane splitting and not wearing gear is still in control of the vehicle, but it'd mostly do damage to yourself and very unlikely anyone else. That's also (often) a sober a straight decision.

Getting behind a wheel when you can barely walk however...

**R1** · 15th December 2005, 15:11

I think your all missing the point, he was 16, they should find the fucker that gave him the grog and chop his arms and legs off....I was 16 once and fuck did i do some dumb shit way worse than drink driving...not that im saying its in any way ok...I just dont see how its made its way to a bike forum...if its crime you all want to talk about there is much worse out there than this..

**R1** · 15th December 2005, 15:14

Originally Posted by bugjuice

driving under the influence could take out a number of people. Lane splitting and not wearing gear is still in control of the vehicle, but it'd mostly do damage to yourself and very unlikely anyone else. That's also (often) a sober a straight decision.

Getting behind a wheel when you can barely walk however...

what if while lane splitting you scare the shit out of the guy drinking and he spills his beer in his lap and the bottle gets stuck under the brake and then he takes out 20 kids on a school bus? is that his fault or yours?

**Grahameeboy** · 15th December 2005, 15:14

Originally Posted by Bykey Cop

With that level, he should have been charged as an adult which is 3 months jail, $4500.00 fine max and minimum 6 months disqualification. Although, being dealt with by Youth Aid, he will probably just get disqualified.

Even 6 months is too short.....we are too soft in NZ....in the UK you would probably get 2 years minimum..........3 month's in Jail does not fit the crime and anyway, that is half the licence ban.......this is why speeding = revenue debate has merit when they dish out paltry sentences for drink/driving offences and fines can be paid off monthly as can be afforded and if they get jailed, no job, no can pay...oh well lets sell the car to pay the fine can always get another when I get out on finance......the deterrent is pretty meagre really......no offence to you Bykey Cop as it must be pretty frustrating for you guys.

**bugjuice** · 15th December 2005, 15:16

Originally Posted by **R1**

what if while lane splitting you scare the shit out of the guy drinking and he spills his beer in his lap and the bottle gets stuck under the brake and then he takes out 20 kids on a school bus? is that his fault or yours?

that's why they invented cans. They crush where as bottles don't