posted 3 years ago

New Drink-Drive Limit In Scotland: Pint Could Push Driver Over Limit

Scottish Parliament To Consider Lowering Drink-Drive Limit

The Scottish Parliament might soon lower the drink-drive limit so that a single pint prevents a motorist climbing behind the wheel. One glass of wine could have a similar impact. The purpose of this initiative is to make driving safer and reduce casualties. Drink-driving, after all, typically leads to 30 deaths and 150 serious injuries per-annum north of the border. Furthermore, Sky News claimed that motorists in Aberdeen and Inverness have more convictions for drink-driving than any other part of the UK. The proposal – that if passed into law could be enforced within months – is to lower the limit from 80mg of alcohol per 100 ml of blood, to 50mg. The equivalent breath test limit would fall from 35 mcg of alcohol for 100 ml, to 22 mcg. The reduction in the urine limit would be 107 mg of alcohol in 100 ml of urine, to 67 mg. This initiative would make the law consistent with Germany, France and Spain but could put a driver close to the England/Scotland border in a confusing situation. He/she could, for example, be legal for part of a journey but - after crossing the border - committing a serious motoring offence. 

The Penalties Of Drink-Driving

The penalties of drink-driving can be significant on both sides of the border, even if nobody is killed or seriously injured. A perpetrator who drives/attempts to drive could, therefore, be imprisoned for 6 months. This might be in addition to a £5,000 fine and 1 year ban. The motorist might also be placed onto a rehabilitation scheme that emphasises the consequences of committing this offence. Such penalties can lead to unemployment, a criminal record, financial hardship, embarrassment and increased insurance premiums (once the motorist is legally allowed back on the road). More serious is if the offender kills (say) another driver or pedestrian while over the limit. The penalty could then rise to 14 years imprisonment, an unlimited fine and 2 year ban. There is also the physiological stress of coping with such a tragic situation. This, of course, is also felt by the victim's and the perpetrator’s families. Furthermore, it is an offence not to provide a breath, blood or urine sample for analysis if requested by the police. An offender might otherwise use this technique to escape the repercussions of his/her actions. The penalty can be 6 months imprisonment, a £5,000 fine and 1 year ban. 


Simple answer is DONT DRINK AND DRIVE, Not even a drop.

I quite enjoyed the comment from Geoff Laws; I too am a chemist and he is absolutely right. It’s about time people woke up to the reality that they are nothing more than cash cows for the corrupt illuminati and their puppet politicians. Tryptophan, found in nearly all food and drink is a vital amino acid which assists the human body in making niacin, a B level vitamin. This chain of biological events helps produce serotonin, a chemical that your body needs in order to “cool off” and relax so that you can “slip into dreamland" (just don’t eat, drink, or breath if you are going to drive a vehicle is the answer– just being sarcastic). When serotonin levels are not normal, sleep disturbances and other issues can result, including chronic fatigue syndrome. Alcoholic beverages are in fact one of the many thousands of chemicals we consume with a source of Tryptophan and Niacin. Everyone is different and everyone is affected in different ways to different things. Although I agree that being drunk and driving is absolutely disgraceful and anyone found doing so should be severely reprimanded, however, to hold the whole population to ransom over having a few alcoholic beverages socially or even in their own privacy is not only criminal but economically, socially and morally devastating. As one of the more learned commenters previously said, you are tens of thousands of times more likely to die from medical negligence or even an allergy than you are with a drink driving accident!

Never have thought the drinking was the problem; its the driving thats a problem. Ifnn youve had a drink drive slow and steady instead of skating around at high speed then having a drink and skating around at high speed. They should ban the use of mobiles in cars; a much greater problem. However the firms own the government.

There is no greater pain than losing a loved one, no matter how it happens or who is to blame. I cannot imagine there is any one person anywhere in the world that enjoys a few drinks on a night out with the intention of killing someone or themselves with their vehicle, but I can guarantee there are thousands of people who every day are plotting to kill people intentionally by whatever means. Even our warmongering governments are bombing innocent people right now. Go and uncover all that is still covered up if you really want to abide by a real code of ethics, go find the real killers and start with your employers!

Road Safety Regimes, sounds scary! Cash Cow sounds more like it!

You will never ever see an intoxicated off duty traffic cop, oh no not ever, what pointers are not well in their lives I wonder?

My Grandma used to always say have a pint of Guinness son, it will do you good. She never said anything about it getting you 14 years in jail!

Whose rules and with what agenda? As a young Chemist, I work and study the many thousands of chemicals put in our foods and drinks that also affect our reaction times, small amounts or large, and are killing us by the thousands every day in the UK. Fluoride in our water being just one which seriously damages brain functioning! One peanut can kill a person who “didn’t mean to eat it”, let us give all the food manufactures who use peanuts 14 years! Do you want to ban everything we eat and drink and breath, it all affects our REACTION TIMES regardless of the amount we intake? Those brainwashed please wake up!

As a young Police Officer I had an 18 year old motorcyclist die in my arms as I awaited an ambulance. The person who killed him was a driver just over the drink drive limit as it is now. He didn't mean to kill him but his reaction times were slowed by the alcohol. We all know the rules on drink drive so please don't feel sorry for those who get caught - if you can't enjoy a night out without getting intoxicated then that might be a pointer that all is not well in your life! Bringing the limit in line with other progressive road safety regimes will end the argument about "can I have one drink or two?" In reality if you are over the limit and you kill someone why should that not be considered as an aggravating factor in sentencing. The driver that killed that motorcyclist 30 years ago has long since moved on and hopefully enjoyed a fruitful and productive life. The young man he killed never had that chance. Please no more sob stories we all know the rules so there is a fool proof way of not getting caught drinking and driving..DON'T DO IT!

So a higher percentage of drivers in parts of Scotland are prosecuted for drink driving than other parts of the UK. How on earth is lowering the drink drive limit going to improve road safety? It may well lead to an increase in prosecutions but that is not the point. Yet more muddled thinking by the powers that be.

A few years ago in the North somewhere a driver had a fatal heart attack and crossed the centre of the road hitting a van head on coming the other way, it was confirmed he was dead before the collision, but the poor van driver was found to be just over the limit from a darts match the night before and he got a manslaughter charge as well as a ban and fine etc. and he wasn’t even to blame. That’s justice for you! Look at the statistics on google… you are tens of thousands of times more likely of dying in hospital through negligence than dying from a drink driving accident.

I knocked a child down a few years ago at 10am in the morning, he ran out from behind a bus texting his mate on his mobile as you see millions of times when people are crossing roads. Thankfully I had dozens of witnesses to say what happened. Dozens of police turned up and they measured the road, thankfully no skid marks so showing I was doing less than 30mph, and they breathalysed me 3 times even though I insisted I hadn’t had a drink that morning but admitted to having had a few cans at home the night before whilst watching a film. Even with all the witness statements saying I had no chance as the boy just ran out in front of me from behind the bus, the police had no hesitation in telling me that if they found that I had been doing even 31mph or even finding the slightest amount of alcohol in my system even from the night before, I was looking at a jail sentence and if the child died in hospital I would be looking at a mandatory 8 year prison sentence. So you cannot drink at all is what these idiots are saying, then God help us, God help the breweries who employ hundreds of thousands of people, God help the hundreds of thousands of venues that sell alcohol and the hundreds of thousands of people going to be made unemployed and as a previous person said, even the Holy Communion is now at risk, so let us just bring the whole world to a standstill with all this self-righteous good door bullshit!

If the government really give a damn about deaths by drink driving, they should subsidise taxis and give us a better public transport system. It is being drunk and driving that is dangerous not someone having just a couple of beers! As a previous person commented, this will close even more pubs and clubs as well as take thousands of people’s driving licences from them just for having a few beers when out socialising thus putting even more people on the dole. Who is going to pay all the unemployment benefits?

The Scottish Committee (or government as it calls itself) says this will reduce deaths and injuries. No it won't. People who drink/drive currently break the 80mg limit so why would they suddenly decide not to break the 50mg limit? It won't make serial offenders think twice at all. All this will do is to convict drivers between 50mg and 80mg who are currently not driving illegally and who are perfectly safe - if they weren't, the law would be changed in England. It's just another example of Salmond's dictatorship and his desire to be different to England in as many ways as possible.

The significant question which should have been asked first before the sanctimonious leap in with both feet is: what is the number of accidents caused by drivers who are between 50 & 80mg. Is there a notable problem in this area, are a lot of people killed or injured by drivers who have had one pint? I think not.

As the last guy said, there is a hidden agenda here... This is the death knell for pubs, clubs and even hotels, especially those in remote locations. 280 people killed last year in drink driving related accidents, or so we are told. 196,000 road traffic accidents last year out of between 10 and 30 million cars on the road every day multiplied by 365 days; this is less than 0.0000000000000000 infinite ‘0’s’ of a percent chance you being killed in a drink driving accident. For what it is worth (source, over 60,000 people die in hospital every year from clinical negligence. There are tenfold that die from food allergies and misdiagnosed medications (sources vast on google). I loved the blood of Christ quote, yeh no more holy communion!!!!

To all you ‘Brainwashed’, ‘Self Righteous’, Good Doer’ ‘Government Monkey’s, do something useful and Wake Up to Reality! Find out what is really happening in this God forsaken world and see who is manipulating all this bullshit!

Why not just take all motorists off the roads? Full Stop! Let’s bring the whole damned world to a bloody standstill and be done with it! When is all this bullshit going to end, just to keep the police in work and generate slush money for our governments to waste? Scientific Fact... everything we consume, whether eating, drinking or breathing etc. affects us and impairs or enhances our brain functioning, and what affects us today may not affect us tomorrow. FACT! That is why drink driving laws are blatantly farcical. When our governments are spending billions of our taxes ‘without my consent’, bombing millions of innocent Muslims, do you really think they give a rats ass about people being killed on our roads, No, in fact their priority agenda is mass genocide as the world is seriously over populated! Just continue with all this righteous bullshit to stop people doing everything and anything and bring the whole damned world to a standstill. Will you?

WHERE DO YOU THINK POLICE RESOURCES OUGHT TO BE PRIORITISED? (Source – ROSPA 2012) Reported Road Casualties in Great Britain. Killed 1,754; Alleged Drink Driving related Deaths 280; Seriously Injured 23,039; Slightly Injured 170,930; Total 195,723. OR.... (Source – NSPCC 2012) 50,500 Children at risk every minute of every day. 1 Child killed every day from physical abuse. 29,837 Registered Sex Offenders for sexual offences against children. 23,000 Sex offences recorded against children. 75,000 Estimated unrecorded sex offences against children. 50,573 Children on child protection registers. 2,400,000 Children severely maltreated. So you want more Traffic Police driving around in tens of millions of pounds worth of very expensive motor cars, your tax money, making people breath into inaccurate machines , taking away your livelihoods, your morality and destroying your family life for having a pint of beer or two on your way home from work???

God help all those who take Holy Communion at church. The spineless traffic police will be waiting outside churches now like they do outside pubs in the mornings to knick the responsible drivers who got taxis home the night before. Go knick some paedophiles you spineless government monkey’s. Blood of Christ???

Regarding the statement"This initiative would make the law consistent with Germany, France and Spain but could put a driver close to the England/Scotland border in a confusing situation. He/she could, for example, be legal for part of a journey but - after crossing the border - committing a serious motoring offence." in the original text above, the simplest answer to avoid prosecution is simply DON'T DRINK AND DRIVE AT ALL. Or am I missing the point!

It would be idiotic to have a zero tolerance as , even withgout the intake of acohol, the human body produces a small amount, therefore no-one would ever be allowed to drive.

Might as well be zero not agree with drink driving but there has to be a little give.still if you know the law then that is in your own hands.

The big trouble with drink drive is that it is a criminal offence but it is teated with the routine approach of a motoring offence. As in a great deal of matters it is the brief of the police to find and prosecute a culprit rather than make a thorough investigation and present the truth to the court. The whole police heirarchy depends on a high volume of successful prosecutions rather than proper policing and a search for truth and that is not a pathway to Justice. Currently intent to commit the offence is assumed as soon as guilt is established with a positive breath test. If there are any mitigating factors that could moderate the sentence it is left to the accused to hire a defence and present them when in fact the police should be doing that as part of investigating the "crime". There must be a host of people who are accidentally over the limit, had no intent to commit a crime and other anomalies, such as people whose bodies produce alcohol naturally who should be dealt with differently if true justice is to be served. The lower the limit is, the bigger that group of people who are denied true justice will be. The police needing to prove an intent to commit a crime along with proving the crime itself is fundamental to true justice and helps keep the punishments in proper proportion, not just to the crime, but also to the degree of the crime. It must be remembered not only in the current (broken) system that seems more geared to raising revenue than dispensing justice, some people are treated too harshly but also a number are treated far too leniently.

Don't forget the morning after the night before.

I have no problem with any drink/drive limit whether it be 80, 50 or zero that tries to stop drunks driving in Scotland, but remember this is a UK problem with drink/driving not just Scotland. The people who drink/drive will still do it no matter what the limit is set at. The limit is just a method of catching them. Also what about the drunken pedestrians, cycles and mobility scoter riders who cause more accidents than drunken motorist, when are they going to be prosecuted as well.

My personal limit I set myself is ZERO, if I've had a drink then its no drive........Drinking then its a taxi home !

David Ward why don't they change the limit to ZERO There's a degree of uncertainty in every measurement, eventually someone who could prove they hadn't consumed alcohol would charged after testing positive, opening up the possibility that others too were false positives, virtually everyone found guilty under the zero limit would then claim to have been wrongly convicted & could potentially get their sentences quashed

You can't have zero tolerance. Reason being lot's of everyday products, mouthwash for example, contain traces of alcohol.

0 limit

quite agree with mr ward should be ZERO tolerance.

Scotland would appear to have a particularly bad problem of people flouting the current drink/drive limit. Is there any proof that people below 80mg but above 50mg are more likely to have an accident? I personally doubt it. If irresponsible people are ignoring the 80mg why would they not also ignore the 50mg limit? resonsible people who stay inside the 80mg limit will be deprived of a pleasure. The pub and restaurant trade will be hit and for no increase in road safety. Drink driving is a problem. We must do something. Lowering the limit is something.

Instead of lowering the limit, which will still confuse everyone why don't they change the limit to ZERO then everyone knows if they have a drink they will be over the limit....simple for all.