Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Recruiting experts in
Accountancy & Finance

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?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
26 Responses to
Drink drivers like to keep on drinking and driving
p1 2:40 pm 19 Jun 12

HenryBG said :

Couldn’t they just test our genes at birth and pre-emptively punish us for everything we potentially might do in life?

Don’t go giving them ideas.

Antagonist 2:32 pm 19 Jun 12

goggles13 said :

how many chances does a drink driver get – nine times is nine too many, and if this person does not get a severe penalty, then our justice system needs a serious overall.

What is a serious overall? A set of overalls that gives you a wedgie you cannot pull out?

HenryBG 2:03 pm 19 Jun 12

p1 said :

HenryBG said :

Or is he being prosecuted for his *potential* to – maybe – cause damage?

Ummm, yes of course he is.

Every single person caught for exceeding whatever arbitrarily assigned limit (to velocity, BAC, drug use, etc) is being charged for their “potential to cause harm” (unless they have actually crashed *before* the cops bretho them/radar check their speed).

Speed, or BAC is used as a proxy for your likelihood to in a crash.

Couldn’t they just test our genes at birth and pre-emptively punish us for everything we potentially might do in life?

Felix the Cat 1:40 pm 19 Jun 12

Confiscating/crushing the cars would go a long way to deter repeat offenders. Good enough for hooning, good enough for drunk drivers.

Watson 1:39 pm 19 Jun 12

aceofspades said :

So “P” platers are being disciplined before they even offend?

Err, no? The 0.05 is regarded as a safe limit for experienced driver, but not for inexperienced drivers.

aceofspades 12:59 pm 19 Jun 12

Watson said :

HenryBG said :

So this guy was picked up for being 0.03?
Clearly this isn’t a safety issue, or I wouldn’t be allowed to drive home at 0.05.

So what is it?

I wonder – did he cause and injury, loss or damage to any person or property?

Or is he being prosecuted for his *potential* to – maybe – cause damage?

Shall we pre-emptively prosecute everybody with a penis due to their *potential* to be a rapist?

Bad laws invite contempt.

The guy was on a 0.00 restriction because he was caught over the limit before. 8 times no less. So are you saying that there should be no consequences for drink driving?

And your analogy makes no sense. A correct analogy would be a convicted pedophile being caught hanging out near a primary school. Would you argue that hanging out near a primary school is not a safety issue as such and so he should be allowed to stay there?

The 0.00 restrictions serve as a disciplinary measure to enable wrongdoers to prove that they are committed to changing their ways, similar to a suspended jail sentence. It’s a ‘one strike and you’re out’ measure which they brought upon themselves.

So “P” platers are being disciplined before they even offend?

Basilbrush 12:56 pm 19 Jun 12

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….)

p1 12:49 pm 19 Jun 12

HenryBG said :

Or is he being prosecuted for his *potential* to – maybe – cause damage?

Ummm, yes of course he is.

Every single person caught for exceeding whatever arbitrarily assigned limit (to velocity, BAC, drug use, etc) is being charged for their “potential to cause harm” (unless they have actually crashed *before* the cops bretho them/radar check their speed).

Speed, or BAC is used as a proxy for your likelihood to in a crash.

bikhet 12:47 pm 19 Jun 12

HenryBG said :

So this guy was picked up for being 0.03?

The report doesn’t say that. It does say that:

a) he failed to stop at a stop sign; and

b) he was driving while disqualified.

He may also have been done for driving while 0.03, but the other two should be enough to arouse the polices’ interest.

Watson 12:42 pm 19 Jun 12

HenryBG said :

So this guy was picked up for being 0.03?
Clearly this isn’t a safety issue, or I wouldn’t be allowed to drive home at 0.05.

So what is it?

I wonder – did he cause and injury, loss or damage to any person or property?

Or is he being prosecuted for his *potential* to – maybe – cause damage?

Shall we pre-emptively prosecute everybody with a penis due to their *potential* to be a rapist?

Bad laws invite contempt.

The guy was on a 0.00 restriction because he was caught over the limit before. 8 times no less. So are you saying that there should be no consequences for drink driving?

And your analogy makes no sense. A correct analogy would be a convicted pedophile being caught hanging out near a primary school. Would you argue that hanging out near a primary school is not a safety issue as such and so he should be allowed to stay there?

The 0.00 restrictions serve as a disciplinary measure to enable wrongdoers to prove that they are committed to changing their ways, similar to a suspended jail sentence. It’s a ‘one strike and you’re out’ measure which they brought upon themselves.

HenryBG 12:23 pm 19 Jun 12

So this guy was picked up for being 0.03?
Clearly this isn’t a safety issue, or I wouldn’t be allowed to drive home at 0.05.

So what is it?

I wonder – did he cause and injury, loss or damage to any person or property?

Or is he being prosecuted for his *potential* to – maybe – cause damage?

Shall we pre-emptively prosecute everybody with a penis due to their *potential* to be a rapist?

Bad laws invite contempt.

Msl 9:49 am 19 Jun 12

I tend to agree that cars should be confiscated – wonder how many people would reoffend then. (unless it’s an emergency or something)

On the subject of drink driving, I always wondered why police didn’t set up rbt stations at the major exits/major roads from civic after 3am on Saturday/Sunday mornings. Maybe it happens now? Been a few years since I’ve been out that late 🙂

goggles13 9:06 pm 18 Jun 12

smont said :

But full marks for picking up this champion on Thursday.

+1

how many chances does a drink driver get – nine times is nine too many, and if this person does not get a severe penalty, then our justice system needs a serious overall.

smont 8:44 pm 18 Jun 12

“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.

Serge, if I could put it politely but bluntly: it concerns me even more – as a tax paying citizen of Weston Creek – that I rarely see police patrolling the Weston Creek district. But full marks for picking up this champion on Thursday.

bundah 7:59 pm 18 Jun 12

Nothing is ever going to change while we continue to run with the current approach.I would have absolutely no objection to drink driving laws and penalties similar to what is in place in Sweden introduced.Now that really would put the cat among the pigeons!

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site