Zero Tolerance

[Grahameeboy]

The fact is (imho) that some there are people on the road who are worse drivers sober than others who may have had one glass of wine.

Same argument with speeding. But at least you don't lose your licence for 6 months if you go 110kph. Well, not yet anyway.

You are right...30% or so of accidents are caused by Drunk Drivers which means that 70% are caused by Sober drivers.........

[Grahameeboy]

Excuse me while I get on my soapbox here.

Kiwi's are known through most of the world as big drinkers, like the Aussies and the Irish.
But drinking is not the issue, stupid is the issue.
There are few things in life that fuck me off as much as a drunk driver injuring/killing others, and then claiming that somehow this is not his/her fault. Somewhere in our culture we have made it ok for 'drunk' to be an excuse to be an idiot, fair enough, many of us have been there.
But for this to be an excuse for someone else being scarred,paralysed or dead is not.
I have been known to physically prevent people from getting into cars when it is obvious they should not be driving. I have even phoned the cops myself and asked them to stop someone I knew was driving pissed, and told them where to find him.
Before my brother was killed by a drunk driver, I was a bit laid back about the whole issue. I thought that speaking up about this stuff was only going to get me disliked or worse.
Not anymore.
Zero Tolerance alcohol legislation would be a waste of time in NZ, in fact it would probably make things worse.
What we need is a zero tolerance culture to stupid, speak out when you see people doing stupid things that endanger others, they might not listen but someone else might get the idea that this behaviour is not ok/cool/fun/etc.
Speak up, the life you save might be mine or my brother/sister/wife/child, or maybe yours.

descends from soapbox, rant over...... for now

It's that annoying 'she'll be right' attitude eh?

[Grahameeboy]

If someone at present is going to drink when they are over the limit, why will they change their behaviour if you reduce the limit?

Indeed , as others have noted , it is more likely that he will drive - because at present the limit is recognised as realistic , others will caution or prevent him. if the limit is seen as unrealistic (which IMHO a zero limit is) then we risk a return to the days when everybody drove after drinking and noone questioned it.

The only validity to such an approach would be if there were significant incidents where people crashed as a result of being impaired by alcohol, but were still under the limit. That would indicate that the limit was too high.

I do not see evidence of that. Most of the crashes due to alcohol impairment, the drivers are WAY over the limit. And usually have a prior history of DIC . Which suggests the real problem is alcoholics, who will not be deterred by any laws. It is an addiction and changing the law isn't going to make any difference to them.

So maybe a law change to require a alcohol/drug dependency assessment , and treatment (if required) after any DUI charge ?

True, however, with a zero tolerance approach it would mean 'no drinking' whereas at the mo you can drink and drive and how many people think they are inside the limit when they are not so if the limit was 'zero' it may make a difference....this is from Sweden.

Alcohol

Even very small amounts of alcohol can affect your driving ability. Sweden has a very strict law that entitles the Police to give a Breathalyzer test, even if there is no reason to suspect that you are driving under the influence of alcohol. If your blood level alcohol content is 0.2 promille or the content of alcohol in your exhaled breath is 0.10mg/l or more, this will result in a stiff fine, a prison sentence or both. You will also lose your driving license. Alcohol also remains in your system the day after you drink it. Do Not Drink and Drive.

See where Sweden are on the attached graph.....seems to make a case.

[mstriumph]

Beat up on me if you like - i'm certainly no angel but i believe that driving or riding on today's roads demands a high level of concentration and focus - and anyone that lowers their ability to do these things - whether thru drink, or drugs, or tiredness, or emotional upset or any other avoidable thing [yep - i'd include drinking hot coffee or eating a hamburger OR TALKING ON THE PHONE] whilst driving is - well - daft.

Problem is, EVERYONE thinks they are an 'above average' driver and can get away with less than full focus 'just this once' ..............

........ but everyone's luck will run out sooner or later

[mstriumph]

.......Kiwi's are known through most of the world as big drinkers, like the Aussies and the Irish.
But drinking is not the issue, stupid is the issue.............What we need is a zero tolerance culture to stupid, speak out when you see people doing stupid things that endanger others, they might not listen but someone else might get the idea that this behaviour is not ok/cool/fun/etc.
Speak up, the life you save might be mine or my brother/sister/wife/child, or maybe yours..................

*borrows soapbox*

the problem is, unfortunately, that from my own observations it is more likely that observers of stupidity will say nothing and not want to get involved and cause a scene .............

i have the attitude that, if you don't speak out and try and prevent something bad from happening then the perpetrator can and will take your silence for approbation and carry right on [this is my stance against bullies and abuse but it works equally well for other forms of nasty]

to me the saddest thing is that the masses cannot distinguish between aggression and intervention and, thus, tend to shrink from confrontation of ANY sort, even when it's the only morally-appropriate behaviour

*descends from soapbox, dusts it off and returns it to Macktheknife*

[Ixion]

True, however, with a zero tolerance approach it would mean 'no drinking' whereas at the mo you can drink and drive and how many people think they are inside the limit when they are not so if the limit was 'zero' it may make a difference....this is from Sweden.

Alcohol

Even very small amounts of alcohol can affect your driving ability. Sweden has a very strict law that entitles the Police to give a Breathalyzer test, even if there is no reason to suspect that you are driving under the influence of alcohol. If your blood level alcohol content is 0.2 promille or the content of alcohol in your exhaled breath is 0.10mg/l or more, this will result in a stiff fine, a prison sentence or both. You will also lose your driving license. Alcohol also remains in your system the day after you drink it. Do Not Drink and Drive.

See where Sweden are on the attached graph.....seems to make a case.

The "no drinking at all so it's simple" argument would make sense if the problem was people a wee bit over the limit crashing . But it's not.

Firstly the present (adult) limit is high enough that anyone who reaches it is definately going to know they're affected. And the double and triple the limit figures that are returned by most alcohol impaired crash drivers, there is no way that they could possibly have thought that they were "still under the limit"

The reality is , that you can pass any law you like, and it won't stop an alcoholic drinking.

The other problem with very low limits (though what is Swedens limit ? Those figures look to actually be higher than our youth rate , definately not zero), is that there is a "when" component, as well as a "much". It takes a long time for lingering traces of alcohol to be completely eliminated from the body. So a zero limit would mean , not only not driving after the party, but not driving the next day, and maybe the one after that too. So it's not just a matter of saying "Oh, people can get a taxi home".

Which of course is why the people propounding a zero limit are almost always wowsers, because they see it as a convenient stepping stone to prohibition.

[Grahameeboy]

We will only achieve a zero tolerance culture if we put in place tools to make it happen, like Zero Tolerance drinking laws as they do in Sweden and the evidence is clear that it works so why do we procrastinate........all this bollocks about civil rights etc just does not cut it because a drunk driver can and does affect the civil rights of innocence people.

So lets stop being a bunch of poofs and just do it and sod those who don't agree cause they are probably some of the offenders.

I even see fellow KBers on rides have 2 or 3 beers......they are all great guys, however, it is a culture and what is wrong we having a few beers at home or walking or nominating a sober driver........can we not have fun sober anymore............

[Squeak the Rat]

Thinking about work distracts me slightly each morning. So does listening to the radio news, or talking to a passenger. Should these be banned while driving?

These are extreme examples and my point is that the line has to be drawn somewhere. And it has been. And the majority of accidents involving alocohol have been above the line, so why lower it??????

[Grahameeboy]

The "no drinking at all so it's simple" argument would make sense if the problem was people a wee bit over the limit crashing . But it's not.

Firstly the present (adult) limit is high enough that anyone who reaches it is definately going to know they're affected. And the double and triple the limit figures that are returned by most alcohol impaired crash drivers, there is no way that they could possibly have thought that they were "still under the limit"

Are you sure?

The reality is , that you can pass any law you like, and it won't stop an alcoholic drinking.

Are you sure. Look at Sweden.

The other problem with very low limits (though what is Swedens limit ? Those figures look to actually be higher than our youth rate , definately not zero), is that there is a "when" component, as well as a "much". It takes a long time for lingering traces of alcohol to be completely eliminated from the body. So a zero limit would mean , not only not driving after the party, but not driving the next day, and maybe the one after that too. So it's not just a matter of saying "Oh, people can get a taxi home".

Tough titties.

Which of course is why the people propounding a zero limit are almost always wowsers, because they see it as a convenient stepping stone to prohibition.

What utter bollocks

...................................

[davereid]

So you're saying it's OK then to drive/ride while under the affluence of incohol as long as one is not caught or one isn't involved in an accident causing injury or death, and that choice should be up to the rider/driver who should be capable of monitoring their own level of intoxication?

No, I'm saying that you are not measurably impaired at 0.08 and that a zero limit is not necessary.

Pretty clearly we could reduce the drink drive limit to zero. But if it doesnt help then its a waste of time.

For that matter we could reduce the speed limit to 10km/hr.

At NO TIME am I suggesting that drink drive is OK.

[Grahameeboy]

Thinking about work distracts me slightly each morning. So does listening to the radio news, or talking to a passenger. Should these be banned while driving?

These are extreme examples and my point is that the line has to be drawn somewhere. And it has been. And the majority of accidents involving alocohol have been above the line, so why lower it??????

Because you will have persistant people who will always drink and drive and some days they are under and some they are not so these people need to be dealt with and if they know that the tolerance is lower they may stop and stop being a potential accident.

[ManDownUnder]

I haven't read it all but...

Cough medicine would put you over the limit.
Repeat drunk drivers won't care anyway (they're breaking the law now... they'll be breaking it then - what difference)
It'll drive the serving of drinks to drivers underground, complicating things and developing a secondary black market industry (per the prohibition years anywhere in the world).

No - education and culture change. If people are likely to listen to their friends more than the cops... make sure the friends have the drink drive bloody idiot mentality.

[Ixion]

Originally Posted by Grahameeboy
The "no drinking at all so it's simple" argument would make sense if the problem was people a wee bit over the limit crashing . But it's not.

Firstly the present (adult) limit is high enough that anyone who reaches it is definately going to know they're affected. And the double and triple the limit figures that are returned by most alcohol impaired crash drivers, there is no way that they could possibly have thought that they were "still under the limit"

Are you sure?

Yes. I'm sure.

The reality is , that you can pass any law you like, and it won't stop an alcoholic drinking.

Are you sure. Look at Sweden.

Yes. I'm sure. Ask Alcoholics Anoymous if you like .

[Squeak the Rat]

I'm sick of people parroting swedish laws. Circumstances are different amongst countries and cultures. I'm sure sweden also have much tougher driving tests - do we implement this also, or just assume that it's solely the zero tolerance approach which is helping.

( can some one please post some objective stats on the swedish drink driving death rate vs NZ)


The car reigns supreme in NZ. Any moron can get a licence to drive on our roads. Public transport in our biggest city is a joke, and getting a cab from the suburbs into town and back can easily cost over $100. Repeat drink drive offenders get a slap on the wrist. And add to that our countries drinking culture.

So do you really think the answer to fixing it is to tell people they can't even have one drink? The cop out answer is to say "look at sweden".

[Ixion]

Originally Posted by Grahameeboy


[I]The other problem with very low limits (though what is Swedens limit ? Those figures look to actually be higher than our youth rate , definately not zero), is that there is a "when" component, as well as a "much". It takes a long time for lingering traces of alcohol to be completely eliminated from the body. So a zero limit would mean , not only not driving after the party, but not driving the next day, and maybe the one after that too. So it's not just a matter of saying "Oh, people can get a taxi home".

Tough titties.

Which of course is why the people propounding a zero limit are almost always wowsers, because they see it as a convenient stepping stone to prohibition.

What utter bollocks

We will only achieve a zero tolerance culture if we put in place tools to make it happen, like Zero Tolerance drinking laws as they do in Sweden and the evidence is clear that it works so why do we procrastinate........all this bollocks about civil rights etc just does not cut it because a drunk driver can and does affect the civil rights of innocence people.

So lets stop being a bunch of poofs and just do it and sod those who don't agree cause they are probably some of the offenders.

I even see fellow KBers on rides have 2 or 3 beers......they are all great guys, however, it is a culture and what is wrong we having a few beers at home or walking or nominating a sober driver........can we not have fun sober anymore............

Rest m'case on both counts