Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Skilled legal advice with
accessible & personal attention

Drink drivers like to keep on drinking and driving

By johnboy 18 June 2012 26

Almost half the 34 drivers caught drink driving in the ACT over the past week were found to be 0.00 licence holders. Police apprehended 14 0.00 licence holders in the week of June 11 -17.

About 9.30 pm on Thursday, June 14, police stopped a vehicle on Namatjira Drive in Weston after the driver failed to stop at a stop sign. The driver underwent a roadside screening test and returned a positive reading.

The 53-year-old Nicholls man was taken to Woden Police Station where he returned an alcohol content of 0.03. The man was found to be disqualified and had been convicted eight times previously for drink-driving.

Sergeant Rod Anderson from Traffic Operations said drivers such as this had no regard for the safety of others on ACT roads.

“It concerns me that someone who doesn’t hold a drivers licence and drinks and drives, shares the road with the rest of the community,” Sergeant Anderson said.

“In the interests of road safety and saving people’s lives, all that the police can do is continue in our efforts to find drink-drivers like this and put them before the court,” he added.

Of the 34 drivers caught drink driving over the past week, seven have had at least one previous drink-driving conviction.

[Courtesy ACT Policing]

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
26 Responses to
Drink drivers like to keep on drinking and driving
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
Jethro 7:16 pm 20 Jun 12

James_Ryan said :

Felix the Cat said :

I don’t know how these interlock things work, what’s to stop their mate/partner from overiding it?

Good to see this discussion including interlock programs. The best source I’ve found is the International Council on Alcohol Drugs and Traffic Safety. They have two excellent papers on this kind of intervention:

http://www.icadts.org/reports.html

The best interlock equipment records a “signature” of the program participant exhaling. They also require a sample at random times during a journey.

+1

I really do not understand why this isn’t being trialled in Canberra

jimbocool 10:12 am 20 Jun 12

HardBallGets said :

HenryBG said :

0.05? 0.08? 0.11? 0.02? 0.00?
Each of these is an arbitrary limit set by a jurisdiction somewhere sometime.

The fact that different places/times have different limits is an admission that this is pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey lawmaking.

And you wonder why so many people still drink-drive?
The law’s an ass.

The law may well be an ass, but the “arbitrary” limits you suggest inform “pin-the-tail” lawmaking are actually BAC points at which crash risk and fatality risk are shown by years and years worth of good data to swing upwards.

Probably haven’t described that very well, but check tables 1 and 2 at the following source and you can see how increased BAC leads to dramatic increases in risk at the .05 .08 kind of range.

http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/research/809-050pdf.pdf

In summary, there’s nothing arbitrary about the BAC readings that different jurisdictions have chosen. What is different is the amount of crash risk that different jurisdictions are prepared to accept in drivers that have consumed alcohol.

Most people only get caught drink driving once. In that respect the current approach is very successful in changing behaviour of people who aren’t alcohol dependant. For people who are alcohol dependant, the current approach fails for the most part. We see these people caught DUI again (and for some, again and again and again). Yet we also see the same process followed and the same sorts of interventions (sanctions) applied. And we ask “when will they learn?” but the same question should be asked of the law enforcement/criminal justice response which is demonstrated to fail at changing the driving behaviour of those with alcohol related health problems.

+1000 and this comment gets my nomination as the Most Sensible Thing Said on RiotACT for Many Years

HardBallGets 9:42 am 20 Jun 12

HenryBG said :

0.05? 0.08? 0.11? 0.02? 0.00?
Each of these is an arbitrary limit set by a jurisdiction somewhere sometime.

The fact that different places/times have different limits is an admission that this is pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey lawmaking.

And you wonder why so many people still drink-drive?
The law’s an ass.

The law may well be an ass, but the “arbitrary” limits you suggest inform “pin-the-tail” lawmaking are actually BAC points at which crash risk and fatality risk are shown by years and years worth of good data to swing upwards.

Probably haven’t described that very well, but check tables 1 and 2 at the following source and you can see how increased BAC leads to dramatic increases in risk at the .05 .08 kind of range.

http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/research/809-050pdf.pdf

In summary, there’s nothing arbitrary about the BAC readings that different jurisdictions have chosen. What is different is the amount of crash risk that different jurisdictions are prepared to accept in drivers that have consumed alcohol.

Most people only get caught drink driving once. In that respect the current approach is very successful in changing behaviour of people who aren’t alcohol dependant. For people who are alcohol dependant, the current approach fails for the most part. We see these people caught DUI again (and for some, again and again and again). Yet we also see the same process followed and the same sorts of interventions (sanctions) applied. And we ask “when will they learn?” but the same question should be asked of the law enforcement/criminal justice response which is demonstrated to fail at changing the driving behaviour of those with alcohol related health problems.

HenryBG 12:01 am 20 Jun 12

LSWCHP said :

Pork Hunt said :

Perhaps we need some sort of genetic testing by the authoritahs.

I may have mentioned on this forum previously that from time to time, I drink like a fish but not since my teens have I felt the need to drink and drive.

As I approach the half century mark age wise, I clearly do not possess the gene that causes so many drunkards to get behind the wheel.

I figure that if I want to have a drink, I can leg it to the pub (and sometimes home), get a lift with a sober driver or have a few at home sitting in the narcolepsy chair.

Even when I’m “off” the grog and stick to my six pint “on the wagon limit”, I have no desire to drive.

What then, causes people to not arrange their affairs so that they don’t drink and drive?

Being a thoughtless inconsiderate arsehat with no regard for your own life, or the lives of other people on or near the road?

I don’t know what this “arsehat” thing is, but I’m guessing it’s some kind of media-driven bandwagon thing, just like your apparent confusion between moral and ethical imperatives and the perfectly arbitrary laws about BAC.

0.05? 0.08? 0.11? 0.02? 0.00?
Each of these is an arbitrary limit set by a jurisdiction somewhere sometime.

The fact that different places/times have different limits is an admission that this is pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey lawmaking.

And you wonder why so many people still drink-drive?
The law’s an ass.

bundah 10:31 pm 19 Jun 12

Basilbrush said :

My car was hit (while I was waiting at the traffic lights in Civic one night many years ago) by a guy who came around the corner and mounted the median strip – he blew .221 – 2nd time in 12 months………….and I understand his first time he blew high too. Amazing these guys are not taught a harsh lesson the first time they are caught. Lucky he didn’t hit a person.

The cops were driving behind him and chased him and when he was pulled over he didn’t even know he had hit someone…..

He got a small fine and licence cancelled (which means squat….)

Well we are talking about the ACT judiciary here,if nothing else they are consistent….consistently pathetic!!

James_Ryan 7:24 pm 19 Jun 12

Felix the Cat said :

I don’t know how these interlock things work, what’s to stop their mate/partner from overiding it?

Good to see this discussion including interlock programs. The best source I’ve found is the International Council on Alcohol Drugs and Traffic Safety. They have two excellent papers on this kind of intervention:

http://www.icadts.org/reports.html

The best interlock equipment records a “signature” of the program participant exhaling. They also require a sample at random times during a journey.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site