30% of drink drivers recidivists

By 10 March, 2011 23

ACT Policing has caught 30 drink drivers in the first week of its month long campaign on 1 March.

Of the 30 drink drivers apprehended, seven were subject to a blood alcohol content (BAC) of 0.00. 11 of the drink drivers were recidivist offenders having been previously caught for drink driving.

On Saturday night (5 March) police apprehended a 47-year-old Gordon man for two drink driving offences. The first offence occurred at 9.10pm where the man underwent a road side test on Drakeford Drive, Greenway and returned a positive result. He was taken to the Tuggeranong Police Station where he recorded a BAC reading of 0.117. The man’s licence was immediately suspended by police.

The second offence occurred at 10.10pm the same evening where police saw the same man driving his vehicle along O’Halloran Circuit, Kambah. As the man had his licence suspended, and classed as a special driver he was subject to a BAC limit of 0.00. The man recorded a BAC of 0.91 and will be summonsed to appear in the ACT Magistrates Court at a later date.

ACT Policing’s Traffic Operations Superintendent Mark Colbran said the latest figures continue a disturbing trend of approximately one third of all drink drivers apprehended being recidivists. ACT Policing has been proactive in informing the community of the targeted approach in relation to drink driving.

“ACT Policing will continue targeting drink drivers across the ACT, and is determined to apprehend and prosecute people who make the decision to drink and drive,” Superintendent Colbran said.

[Courtesy ACT Policing]

Please login to post your comments
23 Responses to 30% of drink drivers recidivists
#1
Rawhide Kid Part312:08 pm, 10 Mar 11

Take their vehicles off them……….

#2
eyeLikeCarrots12:10 pm, 10 Mar 11

What is the solution to drink driving.

Penalties like suspension of license and fines don’t work.

The only other thing I can think of is – no car = no drink driving (Unless they borrow their mother’s, father’s, son’s, daughter’s, brothers etc etc car).

Otherwise you need to change attitudes… on a nationwide scale ?

#3
shadow boxer12:44 pm, 10 Mar 11

I’m going to get smashed here but it’s a bit like the speeding thing, put the limit back to a reasonable level, say .08, and then throw the book at offenders.

zero levels are self defeating, just leads to a lack of respect and a what the hell i’m over now….

#4
Captain RAAF12:58 pm, 10 Mar 11

shadow boxer said :

I’m going to get smashed here but it’s a bit like the speeding thing, put the limit back to a reasonable level, say .08, and then throw the book at offenders.

zero levels are self defeating, just leads to a lack of respect and a what the hell i’m over now….

I said something similar to this a while ago, raise the limit to .1 and smash big time anyone who blows over that.

I was roundly, and possibly hexagonally, shouted down.

What exists now DOES NOT WORK, but no-one is prepared to think outside the square and try something new.

Hence, people keep getting caught, they keep re-offending and the merry go-round goes on…

#5
Tool1:13 pm, 10 Mar 11

shadow boxer said :

I’m going to get smashed here but it’s a bit like the speeding thing, put the limit back to a reasonable level, say .08, and then throw the book at offenders.

The only reason this doesn’t work is because those that have been through the system know it is too easy to do and do again and not get punished. At the moment you lose your licence;big deal I’ll risk driving without a licence, and get a fine that you can take as long as I want to pay off; big deal….

I believe everyone gets a chance, maybe even two, but the recent amendments to the drink driving legislation should have introduced minimum sentencing, there is no excuse for multiple offences in a short period of time. The ACT Courts simply do not issue harsh enoupgh sentences to be a deterrent, even just a week or two in the Hume Hilton would serve as quite the punishment methinks…

#6
Hosinator1:37 pm, 10 Mar 11

My preferred option, is to consider drink driving in particular recidivist drink driving as akin to attempted manslaughter.
As a recidivist you have had the chance to sober up, reflect upon your actions, the possible fine and suspension of your license. If you do it again you are knowingly placing the lives of other road users or passengers at risk and this should be treated in a similar fashion to attempted manslaughter.
Punishment should include all of the following, lengthy jail time, suspension of your license, hefty fine, crushing of your vehicle, dismemberment, feeding to the dogs.

Or we can rely on government legislation for all future vehicles to be fitted with an alcohol breath analyser that immobilises the vehicle if you attempt to drive after drinking.

Even if you legislate this by tomorrow, then it will still take 20 or more years to remove every pre-legislation car off the road and recidivists may choose to maintain their Datsun 120Ys for the rest of their hopefully short lives.

Other issues that arise include, someone else blowing into the breathalyser. Firstly, what a douche bag if a sober person would be willing to do that for a drunk, I would use them for target practice.
Secondly, the breathalyser could also analyse the drivers DNA to ensure the person blowing is the person who owns the vehicle. Yes I know there are other issues associated with this approach.

#7
georgesgenitals1:37 pm, 10 Mar 11

Speeding is one of things where you can creep over the limit, realise what’s happened and slow down. To drink drive, you need to consume alcohol knowing you will be driving soon. There’s far more premeditation to drink driving than many other driving offences.

Maybe we need our courts to be handing out punishments that give people time to think. Instead of sending them to gaol which significantly disrupts their lives, how about we hand out more community service work? There’s plenty of jobs that need doing!

#8
Special G2:06 pm, 10 Mar 11

Go along the lines of hooning laws and take their cars off them. It is far more difficult to keep obtaining another car each time you get caught for drink driving.

#9
p12:07 pm, 10 Mar 11

I think, with the issue at hand being recidivism specifically, that we need to do something to target that.

Various schemes involving the confiscation or crushing of cars are difficult to make work while cars are any interchangeable item (you can drive someone else’s).

What about a system where by police are able to target people with prior convictions? The existing RAPID system would make this pretty easy. Sit by road like a normal RBT but only pull over people with previous convictions? Or would could make people wear a “D” plate on their car for five years after getting their licence back…

I wonder sometimes how many of these people have done their drinking in licensed establishments? Maybe the government could consider legislating for pubs to have a bouncer with a breathalyser at the exit to their car-parks?

While I am all in favour of campaigns like the one running this month, I can’t help but think it shouldn’t be a month long campaign but rather a change to the polices daily tactics. I know they often have other things to do, but maybe they could replace all speed traps with a RBT? Maybe fund them a little better with RBT’s specifically in mind?

#10
EvanJames4:15 pm, 10 Mar 11

I agree with the idea to put the legal limit back up to .08 or even 1. and then nail those that exceed it. Currently you have people going .06 who are clearly unaffected by alcohol.

That said, the laws are working, most ordinary people who go over never do it again and are very chastened with their experience and the fact that they now have a record.

The problem with recidivists is, they have issues. They might be addicted and out of control, or have a bad attitude to laws and don’t care if they have a record. A recent discussion here featured a number of people who clearly regarded the law as a sideline issue to their lives and who did not worry too much about the consequences of breaking it.

So focussing efforts on those people, rather than the very broad approach at the moment, might be a better go.

#11
Rawhide Kid Part35:49 pm, 10 Mar 11

Hosinator said :

Secondly, the breathalyser could also analyse the drivers DNA to ensure the person blowing is the person who owns the vehicle. Yes I know there are other issues associated with this approach.

It would take Months to do DNA testing……

#12
Rawhide Kid Part35:54 pm, 10 Mar 11

eyeLikeCarrots said :

What is the solution to drink driving.

Penalties like suspension of license and fines don’t work.

The only other thing I can think of is – no car = no drink driving (Unless they borrow their mother’s, father’s, son’s, daughter’s, brothers etc etc car).

Otherwise you need to change attitudes… on a nationwide scale ?

Then take their car as well if they are driving it under the influence . Beside who would be an idiot to let a drunk person drive their car?

#13
georgesgenitals8:00 pm, 10 Mar 11

Taking a car off someone doesn’t address the root cause of the issue.

I like the idea of targeting recidivists using RAPID.

#14
LSWCHP9:48 pm, 10 Mar 11

Hosinator said :

My preferred option, is to consider drink driving in particular recidivist drink driving as akin to attempted manslaughter.

Hosinator for President. I like your thinking.

I’ve suffered at the hands of drunk drivers. Anyone can make a mistake and learn from the lesson, but as far as recidivists are concerned I’d like to be able to return the favour.

I also agree with P1. When they’ve got nothing else to do, the RAPID cars should be pulling over recidivist drunk drivers and giving them a bit of a tickle. Constant (ie daily) testing should help them to mend their ways, or get them off the roads.

#15
Special G8:37 am, 11 Mar 11

georgesgenitals said :

Taking a car off someone doesn’t address the root cause of the issue.

I like the idea of targeting recidivists using RAPID.

Addressing the root cause of the issue is addressing two things:

a – ability to drive – no car no drive
b – attitude – some people are just tards who don’t care

Rapid probably has enough going on with targetting (b) with registration/warrants/disqual drivers. But why not if the system can be jinked to add recidivist drink drivers into the mix.

#16
Rawhide Kid Part311:14 am, 11 Mar 11

georgesgenitals said :

Taking a car off someone doesn’t address the root cause of the issue.

I like the idea of targeting recidivists using RAPID.

It might not solve the root cause but it will solve the current problem of putting the general public’s lives at risk.

#17
Lazy I11:21 am, 11 Mar 11

georgesgenitals said :

Taking a car off someone doesn’t address the root cause of the issue.

I like the idea of targeting recidivists using RAPID.

It may not, but it dramatically reduces the risk to others in the community while the drunken idiot sorts out their problems.

#18
georgesgenitals11:39 am, 11 Mar 11

All good thoughts, but we’re assuming the person can’t borrow a car. Plenty of people lend cars to idiots. Also, if it’s only a crapbox car, the person can trot down and buy another crapbox car (probably for less than the cost of the fines).

Taking away a car probably works well for people who generally do the right thing, but for idiots I don’t think it will make much difference.

#19
Hosinator1:05 pm, 11 Mar 11

Rawhide Kid Part3 said :

Hosinator said :

Secondly, the breathalyser could also analyse the drivers DNA to ensure the person blowing is the person who owns the vehicle. Yes I know there are other issues associated with this approach.

It would take Months to do DNA testing……

Not anymore, some DNA scanning is down to 1 hour and that can give you a persons ancestry, race etc.
What I am proposing is a DNA test like for like. Your DNA already on the cars database and just matching the drivers DNA to the cars DB.

DNA security scanners are currently in their prototype phase and within a few years will make their way onto the market.

Don’t be suprised if in the next 10 years you’re opening your car doors using DNA technology.

#20
Mysteryman4:23 pm, 11 Mar 11

EvanJames said :

I agree with the idea to put the legal limit back up to .08 or even 1. and then nail those that exceed it. Currently you have people going .06 who are clearly unaffected by alcohol.

And there are people driving at 0.04 who are in no way capable of driving. Pushing the limit higher to 0.08 or 0.1 would be a very foolish move indeed. It’s not worth the risk to the safety of everyone else on the road for the sake of the very few people who think they are fine at 0.08 or higher.

Also, the point of having a 0.00 limit is so that there is no confusion for special licence drivers (especially new drivers). The message they need to understand is that ANY alcohol means no driving.

#21
One5:07 pm, 09 Aug 12

The following data is for consideration, in regards to ACT Policing statements:

Alcohol – 2,831
Motor Vechicle Accidents – 1,731
Illegal Drugs – 863
Murders – 203

Causes of Death in Australia *
Source: AIHW Quantification of drug caused mortality and morbidity in Australia, 1998 and ABS Causes of Death, 1998.

Those anti-smoking ads come in handy but I think your going to die well before getting to the car.

#22
One5:14 pm, 09 Aug 12

I suggest the following data for consideration of the chief of police, in regards to ACT Policing media statements:

Alcohol – 2,831
Motor Vechicle Accidents – 1,731
Illegal Drugs – 863
Murders – 203

Causes of Death in Australia *
Source: AIHW Quantification of drug caused mortality and morbidity in Australia, 1998 and ABS Causes of Death, 1998.

Anti-smoking ads do come in handy. I think the drinkers will be dead before getting to a car – only if numbers mean anything at all.

#23
HenryBG6:27 pm, 09 Aug 12

shadow boxer said :

I’m going to get smashed here but it’s a bit like the speeding thing, put the limit back to a reasonable level, say .08, and then throw the book at offenders.

zero levels are self defeating, just leads to a lack of respect and a what the hell i’m over now….

Exactly.

Fewer laws equals less crime.

Mysteryman said :

EvanJames said :

I agree with the idea to put the legal limit back up to .08 or even 1. and then nail those that exceed it. Currently you have people going .06 who are clearly unaffected by alcohol.

And there are people driving at 0.04 who are in no way capable of driving.

OK, so enforcing that BAC limit is completely missing the point then. You’re punishing people who are not a danger and you are not punishing people who are.

The actual issue is that there are incapable drivers who are nevertheless given a licence. We all see these drivers every day, infringing all sorts of road rules and creating dangerous situations.

Instead of applying stupid BAC limits to people who are driving perfectly sensibly, how about taking off the roads all the people who are not driving sensibly?

Advertisement
GET PREMIUM MEMBERSHIP

Halloween in Australia?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

IMAGES OF CANBERRA

Advertisement
Sponsors
RiotACT Proudly Supports
Copyright © 2014 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.