Don't you think it's time that the drink driving limit should be changed?

Question

I think because there have been so many deaths and confusion regarding what you are allowed to drink before being over the limit, people should not be allowed to have a drink and then drive this way everyone knows that if you do then you are automatically breaking the law.

Answer 1

I agree, the limit should be zero.

We should stop wasting billions on the NHS in the UK for drunks.

Answer 2

You are factually incorrect, there have been no deaths because of the confusion regarding what you are allowed to drink. The people who disagree with drink driving don't do it and those who believe they should be allowed to do it do it anyway regardless of the law.

There is evidence that at certain times of the day there are more accidents which involve drivers who have been drinking. There is no evidence however, that the said accidents are actually caused by the drinking. In many cases the accidents would have happened whether drink was involved or not and most people are too stupid to see this distinction.

Take the case of drivers coming home after playing a chess tournament and some of them get involved in an accident? Are any of these drivers arrested and placed in the statistics for chess related accidents? I pose this question because that is precisely how ridiculous is the assumption that if a driver is involved in an accident after drinking that the drinking caused the accident, in most cases there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that this is the case.

If I choose to drink and drive that is my business. If I drive dangerously (whether I have been drinking or not) then, and only then is it other people's business.

Answer 3

No I don't. People who drink and drive then cause accidents are normally well over the limit. Lowering it will not stop them. It's like dropping the speed limit from 60 to 40mph because people are driving along the road at 80mph. They were breaking the law in the first place so dropping the limit doesn't change a thing.

As for no pub car parks. That's just silly. If I am driving to a pub I have the choice not to consume alcohol. Pubs do in fact offer a full range of non alcoholic drinks.

Answer 4

There just are not thousands of deaths caused by drunk driving, in fact drunk walking, drunken sex, drunken fights are all equally dangerous. MRSA caused by dirty Hospitals out kills all motoring deaths combined, then there is MS about which no one gives a damn, and thousands of other lives could be extended if a fraction of the Government spend on persecuting motorists was redirected appropriately.
Personally I would like to see an alcohol limit for those in a public place full stop, more than 6 pints and you dont get any more, you want to get ratted do it at home or at a mates or in a hotel where you can sleep
For Driving I favour an 8 hour law. you dont drive for 8 hours after drinking, ( I dont drink alcohol except for religious ceremonies such as Holy Communion myself) but this would be hugely difficult to enforce.
Big problem at present is Plod desperate to prove an increase in drink driving so as to get additional funds, are illegally breath testing people "the Morning After" and some folk are failing marginally on Monday Morning after a saturday Night out and a couple of Pints sunday afternoon. Legally Plod should only stop folk whom they have reason to suspect are over the limit yet in many forces 95% of those stopped are under the limit. The law is the law and officers who do not follow it should be fined and if they persist jailed
I say double the present limit but no driving for 8 hours after your last pint.

Answer 5

The only way to stop people from drinking and driving,is to take it off the market,just like smoking,but we know that's never going to happen,so as long as there is alcohol on the market,people will drink it,same goes for tobacco as long as that is on the market people will smoke, ther is nothing you i or the government can do to cerb all this, except take them both off the market,that way it will sort out the problems we are having,but like i said it aint gonna happen,so we are always going to have problems with this as there is no other options, apart on what the police are doing now,giving fines and a prison term.

Answer 6

I think even if someone has a mouthfull of drink they shouldn't drive! I would never drink at all and drive! You can never say what is a limit because if you have had nothing to eat all day and have half a drink it will effect you! It's stupid and it will prevent alot more deaths if they get stricter. This country is way to soft!!!

Answer 7

I dont think that the law needs to be changed, as I am sure that a lot of research went into finding a safe limit.

I do believe however, that there needs to be much more education so that people are aware of what the limits and dangers are.

Answer 8

I must agree. After 6 years of very succesfull sobriety, over 10,00 deaths per year are directly related to Alcohol!!! Not ONE proven case of a death directly related to marijuana but still it is illeagal just to posses, this has distroyed many a people who were hurting absoluty no-one but alcohol it distroyes families of the problem drinker it devistates familys who have been the inocent driver on the road that the alcoholic kills and devistates so many other inocent people so you tell me- WHAT IS WRONG IN THIS PICTURE!!!!!!!!! Wake up people alcohol should be looked at as it is, THE MOST ABUSED DRUG IN THE WORLD TODAY

Answer 9

i think of that a nil tolerance might produce some very harsh outcomes, because of the fact alcohol continues to be interior the bloodstream of imbibers for various lengths of time. this suggests that a guy or woman who had had a innocuous glass of wine early the previous evening and forgotten all approximately it and whose reactions weren't in any respect impaired with the aid of the journey could discover himself banned for a 365 days following an twist of destiny for which he grew to become into no longer to blame on the thank you to artwork. Likewise, priests who're required to eat the the remainder of the communion chalice (and who could have numerous centers to manage on a Sunday morning) ought to discover themselves banned, in spite of the fact that they have got been in command of their colleges. that throughout turn might propose that they could no longer keep on their parish duties (except a push motorbike ought to conceal the distances in contact). we would have all way of situations of respectable regulation abiding human beings being unfairly criminalised. i think of that all of us have a sensible thought of as quickly as we've reached our decrease and perhaps that's a stable thought for pubs to furnish breathalysers if it extremely is economically achievable. i do no longer agree that one pint makes no sense. that's extremely adequate for me while making use of! Please do no longer think of that i'm an recommend of drink making use of. I stay able the place there are no longer any breathalysers (they place self belief in blood samples interior the form of a serious twist of destiny) and the place that's somewhat terrifying tocontinual at weekends and at specific situations of 365 days. that's the different extreme!

Answer 10

I think that we need the unit lmit, what happens if you use mouthwash, medicine? Some of these have a high level of alcohol which will make a breath test show positive. people could loose their license over something very stupid.