23 December 2008

Drink-Driving on the rise

| Kramer
Join the conversation
94

Get your act together Canberra! The ABC reports that “Canberra drivers look like breaking the record for the number of drink-driving offences this financial year.” People are just not getting the message that drink driving is a crime, and you might end up killing someone or yourself.

So what do you suggest can be done get the message through?

Join the conversation

94
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

Well, I drove from NSW into Canberra and back today, and nary a cop was seen. Actually the roads were very quiet and quite mellow.

I like the way you think 123qwe 🙂

Couldn’t be f’ed reading the entire blog on this one, but how about imposing the same rules that applies to hoons who have been busted doing burnouts?

A simple (or not so) burn-out, witnessed by the cops, can mean immediate impounding of the vehicle for 3 months. No court straight away. Car gone, bye bye.

Why not the same with the vehicles of pickled idiots?

2nd time occurring, police can auction the vehicle, proceeds of crime? Gold!

While it would be great to have more options for a cheaper ride home (I think the night rider buses are a great idea), I think that people just have to be more accountable for their actions – both for your own actions, but also for the actions of your friends. People seem to be less and less willing to confront friends when they know that they are not ok to drive, or to even accept lifts with friends over the limit because it’s cheaper. What’s wrong with having a designated driver, sharing a taxi (not always possible I know) or, shock horror, having a night out that doesn’t involve getting blotto?

There is no excuse for drink driving EVER. If people want to drink that much, stay at home and do it, or save up enough cash to do it safely and make a ride home part of your going out budget.

harvyk1 said :

Tooks said :

ant said :

Granny said :

Harvyk1,

I haven’t seen any cops anywhere yet, catching speeders or drunks. I wonder where they can all be?

Just because you haven’t seen any, doesn’t mean they aren’t around 😉

Um, if you going to quote me, please actually quote something I say, the above quote was one writen by ant. I personally have seen coppers out and about, and doing RBT’s.

Yeah I realised I left your name in after I hit post. That’ll teach me for not previewing.

harvyk1 “The problem with drink driving is not that your no longer able to drive a car (Otherwise no drunk drivers would be getting home). It’s the fact that you will not be able to react quickly enough, or in the correct methods if something goes wrong.”

Typed like a true drunk. The fact is when you are drunk your an asshole. In a car you are a dangerous asshole. Driving down the road you are a lethal drunk dangerous asshole about to kill your mate or an innocent stranger. Most asshole’s I know couldn’t react to a corner in the road. Anything less and your a delusion asshole.

If you actually read my comments, I said “It’s kinda like a more advanced version of the US’s sobriaty tests.”

I personally believe the US’s sobriaty tests are a joke. Good balance does not make a good driver. Having a fast reaction time however does (sometimes). My idea is that when the coppers pull you over, rather than blowing into a box, you are given a box with a few buttons, one of the buttons lights up and you have to press that button within a specific period of time, otherwise your reaction time is to slow, and thus when a roo, or a kid runs out onto the road, or when the car slams on it’s brakes, you can react quickly enough.

The problem with drink driving is not that your no longer able to drive a car (Otherwise no drunk drivers would be getting home). It’s the fact that you will not be able to react quickly enough, or in the correct methods if something goes wrong.

Tooks said :

ant said :

Granny said :

Harvyk1,

I haven’t seen any cops anywhere yet, catching speeders or drunks. I wonder where they can all be?

Just because you haven’t seen any, doesn’t mean they aren’t around 😉

Um, if you going to quote me, please actually quote something I say, the above quote was one writen by ant. I personally have seen coppers out and about, and doing RBT’s.

ant said :

Granny said :

Harvyk1,

I haven’t seen any cops anywhere yet, catching speeders or drunks. I wonder where they can all be?

Just because you haven’t seen any, doesn’t mean they aren’t around 😉

Queanbo cops woudln’t do that, they’re very serious. So it’s odd I haven’t seen any. Maybe they’ve rented themselves out to the ACT.

tylersmayhem3:24 pm 24 Dec 08

I haven’t seen any cops anywhere yet, catching speeders or drunks. I wonder where they can all be?

Speeding dow the parkway doing 15okm.hr while drinking UDL’s is my guess!

Granny said :

Harvyk1, I couldn’t pass a US sobriety test sober! I can’t balance on one leg without falling over for instance. This doesn’t mean I can’t or shouldn’t drive.

And people who teach balance for a living can pass that test when they’re blotto. Bloke I taught with in Colorado never failed one, and he was permanently pickled (french-qualified and learned bad habits there).

I haven’t seen any cops anywhere yet, catching speeders or drunks. I wonder where they can all be?

Pommy bastard1:36 pm 24 Dec 08

Danman said :

.

And as fiona stated with teh non heated up alcoholic foods i.e. rum balls, trifles etc, Mrs Danman made a damn fine trifle on the weekend, which was mighty heavy on th ealcohol, or so it tasted.

How tofix drink driving… Punish it as a voilent crime, as it has th epotential to be…

God, that trifle must have been strong….

On a slightly tangential note, has anyone else wondered why a certain class of petrol head crimes – burnouts, street raqcing etc – can attract a penalty that includes vehicle confiscation, yet drink driving can not?

I have come to certain cynical conclusions based on the demographics of legislators and potential offenders. Does anyone have any non-cynical explanations?

tylersmayhem11:35 am 24 Dec 08

I totally agree with you. I will say though, that the cameras on the parkway and Monaro Highway are totally useless. They slow drivers down for about 500mts (maximum) then they speed up again.

I had a thought on this last night Spidey – after hearing that 2 motorcyclists (hopefully the same 2 from a month or so ago who didn’t get caught), were caught doing 200 and something on the parkway.

While I’ve always questioned the use of cameras on the main parkways, I can only assume that it deters veichles using is as a race strip. Perhaps the cameras at least force them to wind down to the limit a couple of times, thus making it less possible to hit 200 km/h for the whole length of the road. Similar to how I’ve noticed several suburban straight streets having chicanes or speed bumps put in to deter the drag racing type behaviour.

Lord knows, when I was much younger I remember going down all these mentioned main roads well over 200km/h in a mates rotary. Had there been cameras, we would have been done. In fact, we more likely just would not have done it.

tylersmayhem11:29 am 24 Dec 08

You want a door to door service, expect to pay for it. Don’t like it,,f***ing walk !

Thanks for your input Devil…I do f**king walk, or catch a bus or just don’t go out – rather than pay ridiculously overpriced cab fares. Now, for your $9 an hour rant…

Pasta with a white wine sauce would not have been a factor.
When you heat wine up, the alcohol evaporates and leaves flavour.
This would have been the case.

And as fiona stated with teh non heated up alcoholic foods i.e. rum balls, trifles etc, Mrs Danman made a damn fine trifle on the weekend, which was mighty heavy on th ealcohol, or so it tasted.

Funny thing was that only about a glass of marsala went into it.
Just because you can taste it in every mouthful does not indicate concentration of alcohol.

As for H1NGO, you are pretty much on theball as well.

I hate getting drunk in public, so its either at my house or a friends whose house I can sleep at….

That way you’re not paying for cab fares, cover charges, exorbitant fees for drinks, you dont have abusive knuckle draggers to deal with (Including door staff) and can have a safe and merry ole time, knowing that should you be in any danger you will be safe and looked after..

As for the drink driving, I am not so anal to not have ANY alcohol when planning to drive, but I too enjoy a beer or cab merlot with dinner too.

How tofix drink driving… Punish it as a voilent crime, as it has th epotential to be…

Not really @ #80. Too many rum balls or trifle att Chrissy shouldn’t be an excuse for being over the limit..

A 0.0% limit isn’t the answer. A friend of mine blew more than that after having pasta with a white wine sauce and a beer at a restaurant. He was so close to the limit, he was taken to Civic police station and put on the blue breathaliser. His reading was just under 0.05. There has to be some leeway given to people who have had cough mixture containing alcohol and those who have food which contains alcohol. Not a lot of leeway but some.

Pommy bastard7:01 am 24 Dec 08

There seems to be two distinct ideas being floated here.

One is to make it easy for people to get transport if they are going to drink, the other to punish those who exceed the limits.

Would it not be a good idea to do both?

Harvyk1, I couldn’t pass a US sobriety test sober! I can’t balance on one leg without falling over for instance. This doesn’t mean I can’t or shouldn’t drive.

Clown Killer said :

Harvyk1 the 0.05 limit is there because that’s whats considered the best coverage of the population by minds far greater than you or I. We all know people who probably shouldn’t drive after having had a liqueur chocolate and there are others who appear fine after a skin-full (although they’re not). I’m guessing 0.05 works because the greatest majority of people are fine below it and peoples abilty to cope with the unexpected drops off significantly as you go past that 0.05 level.

I used to love the 0.08 level that applied in the ACT. Not because it was more sensible, but because I could wander up to The Stockade and have four schooners in around an hour and a half after finishing my shift and still be safe to drive home … I was crap, but I was crap and legal.

But half my point is that alcohol is only one of many things which stop people from been safe drivers. They should be gauging peoples reaction times (which is what your lacking when you drink too much) rather than say – your fine, because the meter says you are.

Something which could be done is a device which has a few buttons, and a light changes to a certain colour at a random point in time (could be after 2 seconds the machine is handed to you, could be after 20 seconds). You have to then select the correct button, within a certain time limit (eg .5 of a second) and you have to repeat the test a couple of times. Someone who has a slow reaction speed, be it from alcohol, be it from poor driving skills will be picked up.

It’s kinda like a more advanced version of the US’s sobriaty tests.

Reprobate had a good clue there … so i will suggest that if drink-driving is a crime, maybe it should be treated it like one. Zero tolerance. One chance so-to-speak. First offence = lifetime disqualification … a ban on owning a vehicle etc. This will take a while, maybe even a generation. But, the next generation [obviously with a new letter of the alphabet (why do they do that?) to distinguish themselves] will view drink driving as social and moral sin [for want of a better word folks]. One day…

But not this Christmas. Maybe Kevin 2027 (his grandson) will stand on “Social Climate Change”.

Devil_n_Disquiz11:24 pm 23 Dec 08

I’ve not been in a mod queue before. Is there a medal or something I get ?? 🙂

S’cuse my brain fart

Vic Bitterman10:19 pm 23 Dec 08

Brazil has recently imposed a 0.02 limit on drivers. Exceed this, your licence is gone for a year minimum, vehicle impounded and prison time. At least according to this link :

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/22/AR2008122202199.html?hpid=artslot

Devil_n_Disquiz9:54 pm 23 Dec 08

#29 And keep in mind that I understand cabs increased their fares when the cost of fuel sky-rocketed. They passed that cost on to the customer. Now fuel prices have almost halved. I also suspect they haven’t handed that one on.

Yeah,,fuel went up, and so did interest rates, rents, food etc etc etc. It may interest you to know that we taxi drivers etc all have living costs as well. So answer me this, how do you think lower taxi fares is going to help us make a living ? And don’t bother with the “lower taxi fares = more clients” bulls**t, cos that doesn’t wash.

You want a door to door service, expect to pay for it. Don’t like it,,f***ing walk !

[ED (Kramer) : D_n_D good work getting in the mod queue! Don’t worry, I’ve fixed your post so your grandma can read it now.]

Funny how the records start to break when they actually bother putting some officers on the road with some little breath testing machines. It’s played up as that drivers have become worse in their drink driving habits lately, when in reality they would probably find exactly the same thing would happen if they sat out on the roads most weekends.

It’s similar to when they are given funding to perform targeted operations for buglary and picking up the kids wandering around at 2am in South Tuggeranong (as happened earlier in the year). But the Government still puts piss poor amounts of funding into putting more police on the streets and keeping them there.

You can actually start paying for the next day’s parking at the end of the first day – eg after 9.00 Friday, you put money in and get a ticket for the next day. It might be a bit tricky after X many drinks tho.

But i agree with everyone that is offering suggestions to make it easier for people not to drink drive – eg more taxis, cheaper fares on Fri/Sat night, nightrider busses, free sat AM parking etc etc.

Just telling people not to drink drive is not 100% effective.

Reprobate said :

Unfortunately I really think we’re not seeing a spike in the number of drink drivers ATM, just more being caught because of the targeted operation. Just look at crowded carparks late on the weekends in Civic and Manuka, then how empty they are on Sat/Sun mornings, and tell me all the people who drove them away were designated drivers or teetotallers… As much as the police and the govt are now huffing and puffing about what a disgace this is (and rightfully so), I think it’s partly down to the seeds of invisible policing and revenue raising speed cameras sowed over the last few years.

I’ve always thought that the Saturday morning pay parking in Civic is the cause of many drink driving incidents. I imagine quite a few people have a few too many happy hour drinks, do the right thing by leaving their car overnight only to receive a parking fine the next day. Then you get the people doing the wrong thing who would prefer risk a DUI than have a parking fine. I think the Government should allow a compromise by allowing the purchase of an “overnight” parking ticket that will get you through to midday the next day.

Me? I have a self applied limit of 0.0 when driving.

I will never drink and drive. Ever.

Clown Killer7:06 pm 23 Dec 08

Harvyk1 the 0.05 limit is there because that’s whats considered the best coverage of the population by minds far greater than you or I. We all know people who probably shouldn’t drive after having had a liqueur chocolate and there are others who appear fine after a skin-full (although they’re not). I’m guessing 0.05 works because the greatest majority of people are fine below it and peoples abilty to cope with the unexpected drops off significantly as you go past that 0.05 level.

I used to love the 0.08 level that applied in the ACT. Not because it was more sensible, but because I could wander up to The Stockade and have four schooners in around an hour and a half after finishing my shift and still be safe to drive home … I was crap, but I was crap and legal.

Pommy bastard7:04 pm 23 Dec 08

harvyk1 said :

I personally believe that having an arbitrary figure as the method of working out if a person has had too much to drink to then drive is crazy. Alcohol affects different people in different ways.

They really need to change their methods of testing, and make it purely based on reaction time. If you are unable to react to a situation within a certain period of time, you shouldn’t be on the road.

I’m sorry but I cannot agree with you.

Alcohol blood level is not ‘arbitary” but a precise and easily meaured quantity. Reaction testing proves nothing.

Ooops, end quote after the first para.

Spideydog said :

tylersmayhem said :

I will say though, that the cameras on the parkway and Monaro Highway are totally useless. They slow drivers down for about 500mts (maximum) then they speed up again.

Just about all of the fixed speed cameras are in useless spots in the ACT. They all seem to be on straight double lane roads with median strips. In NSW they put them where people tend to die. In Canberra it looks like they’ve just randomly selected a few spots and said ‘that’ll do’.

and I can’t believe that they’re there for revenue raising. There are so many warnings that I don’t know how you could get caught – unless you were sleep driving.

The speed camera vans are another story…

I personally believe that having an arbitrary figure as the method of working out if a person has had too much to drink to then drive is crazy. Alcohol affects different people in different ways. the main problem is that it affects a persons reaction time. By saying that you can be 0.049 and yet still ok to drive is the worlds biggest joke. I know of people who can be 0.01 and yet they are not ok to drive, and yet I also know people who I trust driving even if they where 0.1.

They really need to change their methods of testing, and make it purely based on reaction time. If you are unable to react to a situation within a certain period of time, you shouldn’t be on the road. This will catch out people who are not only to drunk to drive, but also people who are too fatigued to drive, people whom have too much other stuff happening in their mind to drive. In fact, it’d probably remove quite a few of the bad (and thus accident causing) drivers from our roads.

Also it would be both easy to detect, and it would be possible to sell devices to the general public which will test their reaction times prior to hopping behind a wheel. One of the great fallacies of the current system is that if you’re only a little over, sit around and wait it out. Problem is that once you’re under you may be beyond tired, and thus still shouldn’t be behind the wheel, and yet legally there is nothing stopping you.

Also in response to a few posts back, why should I pay $80 to taxi it home from the city? We are now talking a large percentage of the total cost of the night. Considering that buses can be used to fairy people home, why not give people that option year round.

Agree with Spideydog etc. Put them at the schools where the two seconds of slowing down will actually be useful.

Speed cameras at School Zones is an excellent idea, because, yes, all they do is have drivers slow down while they’re in view. The Qbn cops sometimes camp outside the Qbn East school, so much so that drivers come into the zone, crane their necks to see if the cops are there, and if not, they zoom up to speed again! Often when there’s kids beetling around the vicinity. Speed cameras would have them slowing down properly for the whole zone.

Proper speed traps with winkling lights, blinged-up cop cars sneaking around in traffic, THAT is what’s needed to change the aggressive crazed drivers around here. Anyone who does the speed limit gets tailgated and beeped and has rude gesters made at them. This low-profile policing stuff the government has been on about doesn’t work for traffic.

Roadworks zones too.

Thanks Tylersmayhem 😉

@VYBerlinaV8 – We could only hope !!

After reading a few other posts in here, I think people should realise that speeding isn’t ALL about being a CAUSE of a crash. It is also significantly about harm minimisation. If people do find themselves in a crash and if they are doing the posted speed limit, there is far more chance of either hazard avoidance, and/or less damage/trauma than those doing in excess of the speed limit.

If we can’t avoid a crash, at least minimise the damage/trauma it causes.

But Yes, the emphasis should always be on road safety and not on revenue raising.

tylersmayhem4:21 pm 23 Dec 08

Where do we want drivers to do that … ?? At a school zone. Put these cameras at school zones to slow drivers down for that 500mts or so…

Very good point Spidey!

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy4:05 pm 23 Dec 08

Great idea Spideydog. Anyone in govco listening?

Despite creeping over the limit on occasion on lonely roads, school zones are sacrosanct.

tylersmayhem said :

…and revenue raising speed cameras sowed over the last few years.

I am still gobsmaked every time I hear this moronic statement. These cameras are only revenue raising when people refuse to adhere to the clearly posted speed limits. There is never an argument against speed cameras, fixed or not. Don’t f**king break the law by speeding, and you’ll have nothing to whine about!

I totally agree with you. I will say though, that the cameras on the parkway and Monaro Highway are totally useless. They slow drivers down for about 500mts (maximum) then they speed up again.

Where do we want drivers to do that … ?? At a school zone. Put these cameras at school zones to slow drivers down for that 500mts or so, because that is where we want them to slow down (to not get done by the camera) By the time they get past the camera and go to speed up again, the camera has done it’s job.

Put the cameras where they will be effective and actually do something.

I so shouldn’t drive at 0.08… one drink on a tired Friday night is bad enough!

“It is also possible to be charged with driving or attempting to drive under the influence of drink or drugs even with a BAC level is below 80 mg. Such cases are rare but not unknown. In addition, a BAC level not far below 80 mg is likely to be regarded by the courts as an aggravating factor if charges are brought for causing an accident. ”

So it’s all well aand good until you’re in an accident. Anyone know of the wording here or elswhere in Au?

Pommy bastard3:36 pm 23 Dec 08

Sorry, I was giving an example, one of my own, not of other country’s. I didn’t think people would want me to lay down a legally enforcable determination.

Here you go, some information on the UK

The UK legal limit for drivers is 80 mg of alcohol per 100 ml of blood, often referred to as a BAC or blood-alcohol concentration. In US terms this would be expressed as 0.08%. This is alternatively expressed in terms of breath alcohol – 35 µg (microgrammes) per 100 ml (which is now the usual official measure in the UK), or alcohol in the urine – 107 mg per 100 ml.

This is often reckoned to be equivalent to two pints of ordinary strength beer which, for a man of average weight, is broadly true, but should not be used as a general rule – see Drink-Driving Guidelines. It is impossible to draw an accurate correlation between the amount of alcohol consumed and the resulting peak BAC, and anyone trying to “drink up to the limit” runs a serious risk of exceeding it.

It is also possible to be charged with driving or attempting to drive under the influence of drink or drugs even with a BAC level is below 80 mg. Such cases are rare but not unknown. In addition, a BAC level not far below 80 mg is likely to be regarded by the courts as an aggravating factor if charges are brought for causing an accident.

tylersmayhem said :

One medium strength beer should be the limit. (or equivalent.)

Speaking of “wishy washy” limits Pommy! What, it that one mid-strength a session, or one per hour, or one per hour for a bloke, and half for a chick?

Wishy washy indeed!

And one of the issues is of course the insane variation in sizes of wine glasses! 0.0 I was down more than have a bottle last night before I knew it! (yes self monitoring and control and all that, but a little consistency is good)

tylersmayhem3:07 pm 23 Dec 08

One medium strength beer should be the limit. (or equivalent.)

Speaking of “wishy washy” limits Pommy! What, it that one mid-strength a session, or one per hour, or one per hour for a bloke, and half for a chick?

Wishy washy indeed!

Pommy bastard2:39 pm 23 Dec 08

Not that I’ve any need to take notice of them, as I am teetotal, but your drink driving limits seem a bit wishy washy compared to other country’s.

I would suggest a very low limit of blood alcohol, and an automatic years loss of license for exceeding it, with the punishments increasing exponentially for greater excesses or repeated offenses.

One medium strength beer should be the limit. (or equivalent.)

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy1:41 pm 23 Dec 08

I should add that it would be interesting to see real statistics that isolate drink driving and speeding, against scenarios where both occurred.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy1:40 pm 23 Dec 08

I tend to agree with tool. Until you actually take a stand, or people just won’t care. It’s like speed cameras now. Every few years I’ll get a ticket and have to pay a hundred bucks – who really gives a crap? Not me.

I believe drink driving to be one of the major causes of accidents. It’s certainly a much greater factor than speeding. Unless you send a clear message that this is not acceptable (ie take their car and arrest offenders), people just won’t care.

I know a guy who was done DUI, and as a first offence scored a few hundred dollar fine and a 3 month license suspension. Is this really the level to which we value road safety?

Tylersmahem – I stand by my statement and am glad that you agree, speed cameras are a form of voluntary taxation, ie revenue raising devices for the Government. I don’t accept that they effectively reduce the road toll, they don’t catch speeding drivers beyond their limited area of vision, and they contribute to a mentality of “well, if I don’t speed then I am safe ” which, in the context of drink driving in particular, is utter bollocks. The mere fact that governments are happy to receive – and indeed forward budget for – an increasing revenue stream from speed cameras tells you all you need to know about their reason for being used.

Oh, before you ask, I have been driving for 23 years, I have had one speeding ticket in that time and that was issued by a cop for 73 in a 60 zone 20 years ago, no other infringements.

May seem extreme, but how else will you get the message across in this ‘politically correct human rights’ era we live in. What is the punishment for drink driving? a fine? a loss of licence only to be given it back with ‘conditions’? You can’t even be held criminally negligent if you kill someone whilst drunk in a car. The least we can do is prevent people from driving and hit them the hard way. If you need a car for a living too bad, get another job or don’t drink and drive, remember people make choices, a bashing on the news serves little purpose as public awareness seems to have no impact.

If we ban every car from the road except me, and a few specific people I nominate, then the problem goes away. Plus, there would be lots of good cars going cheap…

“Easy fix; arrest every drunk driver and make them apply for bail from a court. Impound the car they drove in, and make them apply to get it back. Automtaic licence disqualification until court says otherwise.”

Cool, can we do that for all the old people that can’t drive too? (and those on mobile phones, exhausted parents who could fall asleep at the wheel, people with anger issues etc).

tylersmayhem12:56 pm 23 Dec 08

Simply place a police car 100 yards away from every major club in canberra on a Saturday and Sunday night and they will catch hundreds.

Indeed, and this used to happen a lot. Since I don’t go out much any more, I wouldn’t know. In fact, I’ve heard of coppers in civvies milling around Bobby McGees in te day, close to closing time, standing chatting with stubby bottle full of water and watching people leave. Then they’d go and bust the people who just left after watching them get in their car.

Pretty cheeky, and crafty – but again, like the speed camera argument – if you insist on breaking the law, you have to accept getting done for it, regardless of the method used.

The amount of pickled oldies I see leaving the club on a weeknight and driving is truly shocking. One of them is gonna collect me on my bike one day for sure, thankfully they only drive about 10kph.

Easy fix; arrest every drunk driver and make them apply for bail from a court. Impound the car they drove in, and make them apply to get it back. Automtaic licence disqualification until court says otherwise.

This offence kills people but nobody gives a s**t, hit people where it hurts; take their car, and licence at the first instance, this will have an immediate impact, then let the sob stories flood in….

can’t afford a taxi?

far too drunk to drive?

easy.

walk.

tylersmayhem12:51 pm 23 Dec 08

…and revenue raising speed cameras sowed over the last few years.

I am still gobsmaked every time I hear this moronic statement. These cameras are only revenue raising when people refuse to adhere to the clearly posted speed limits. There is never an argument against speed cameras, fixed or not. Don’t f**king break the law by speeding, and you’ll have nothing to whine about!

I think the 0.00bac rule as a law is a bit over the top, but it is a good rule to follow individually. Sometimes its nice to have a beer with your meal at a club and drive home.

No doubt I’ll be ridiculed for suggesting this, but since we’re clearly losing the war on drink driving I think we should adopt the harm-minimisation method. That is, we need to make roads, cars etc safer for those who have a few too many before they get behind the wheel. For example we should be building padded barriers on the sides of roads, bright flashing lights to keep drivers awake and in-car warning signals for drivers whose cars are veering off course.

I’m certainly NOT condoning drink driving – I just think we need to be realistic about the problem and explore novel approaches.

I have to say I impose Reprobate’s rule on myself. If I’m driving I simply wont drink. The temptation would be too much to have ‘one more’ then not be sure if I’m ok or not… legally that is.

Mind you, I really wish the issue of dangerous driving would be addressed more as a whole. Exhausted drivers are just as likely to have a head on and kill someone (not to mention old people – don’t get me started) as the guy who’s had 3 beers at a barbie (but who is technically over the limit).

If I’m driving, it’s soft drink then home.

For mine, let’s start with a 0.0 BAC for all drivers, all the time – ie if you drive, you don’t drink at all. Let’s face it, once someone has had a few bevvies, who can ALWAYS accurately judge if they are legal – or, for that matter, safe – to drive? The difference between 0.049 and 0.051 – and therefore between a legal state and committing a crime – can’t be established by anyone without calibrated equipment and subject to a second test. What hope does your average punter have after walking out of the pub/club/friends place, thinking “well, there’s my car, I’ve only had a few, I cant be bothered to wait for or afford a taxi, no bloody buses about, so…”

Buses arn’t the solution – little Craig or Jai’me gets ratarsed in Civic til 4am and needs to get back to the Burbs, so unless you have a direct bus leaving civic for each suburb, they are going to be dumped at Belco/Woden/Tugg interchange waiting to catch a bus along with a few dozen other drunk yobs. A great place to see Darwinism at work. Then get off at a stop somewhere near home, stagger along yelling, smashing bottles and puking on somones front yard. Top night!!!

Unfortunately I really think we’re not seeing a spike in the number of drink drivers ATM, just more being caught because of the targeted operation. Just look at crowded carparks late on the weekends in Civic and Manuka, then how empty they are on Sat/Sun mornings, and tell me all the people who drove them away were designated drivers or teetotallers… As much as the police and the govt are now huffing and puffing about what a disgace this is (and rightfully so), I think it’s partly down to the seeds of invisible policing and revenue raising speed cameras sowed over the last few years.

Felix the Cat12:08 pm 23 Dec 08

frontrow said :

They are running night buses for the festive season:

http://www.action.act.gov.au/nightrider_2008.html

I know they have run them before, does anyone know why they aren’t run more regularly?

Probably no patronage and not enough drivers.

Jonathon Reynolds11:59 am 23 Dec 08

The old Victorian TAC TV campaign sums it up pretty succinctly:
If you drink and drive… You’re a bloody idiot

http://www.tacsafety.com.au/jsp/content/NavigationController.do?areaID=13&tierID=2&navID=63669FDA7F0000010002585EA3F787F2&navLink=null&pageID=452

tylersmayhem11:52 am 23 Dec 08

I know they have run them before, does anyone know why they aren’t run more regularly?

Because the majority of Camnberrans have this bizarre refusal to use public transport.

Recently my wife and I were going to a party in the city, as was her sister and husband. When we told them we were catching a bus, they looked at us like we had just grown a third eye. They live a couple of suburbs away and opted to pay about $40. We paid $4.40 for both of us and got there before them. If they had regular night services, we would have caught a bus home too.

They are running night buses for the festive season:

http://www.action.act.gov.au/nightrider_2008.html

I know they have run them before, does anyone know why they aren’t run more regularly?

Clown Killer said :

In my view the taxi cost issue is a bit of a cop out and saying that there should be cheaper taxis or free buses or whatever is really about a failure to take personal responsibility for your own actions.

How can it be a cop out? I just told you it is the main reason I don’t go out in Civic. I’d ratehr buy a good case for that much. I’m taking resposibility, I don’t drink and drive, I stay home instead. Unfortunately, there are people who would risk it rather than paying Canberra’s highly inflated taxi fare. I’m not saying it is right, it is fact.

tylersmayhem11:15 am 23 Dec 08

In my view the taxi cost issue is a bit of a cop out and saying that there should be cheaper taxis or free buses or whatever is really about a failure to take personal responsibility for your own actions.

I still tend to think that cab fares are extortionate! I also think this plays a part in CBD business closures, or lack of choice in the city. I’m sure there are more people staying home to eat, drink and be merry. Therefore restaurants, bars and clubs miss out on the dollars – not to mention cabbies to I suspect.

I personally would go out more often if cab fares were cheaper. And keep in mind that I understand cabs increased their fares when the cost of fuel sky-rocketed. They passed that cost on to the customer. Now fuel prices have almost halved. I also suspect they haven’t handed that one on.

None of these comments are based on fact, and I’m probably missing several key points here – but it’s an interesting discussing related to drink driving.

So in closing Clown Killer – in an ideal world you are right – but in practice it really doesn’t necessarily work.

Clown Killer11:03 am 23 Dec 08

In my view the taxi cost issue is a bit of a cop out and saying that there should be cheaper taxis or free buses or whatever is really about a failure to take personal responsibility for your own actions.

If I want to enjoy a few drinks with friends without the worry of endangering myself, my passengers or other road users on my way home I see a cab fare as a small price to pay. It’s actually just part of the cost of going out. Honestly, if you cant afford the $50 to get home then you shouldn’t be drinking so much that you cant drive yourself.

there also need to actually be taxis available.

i will admit to being borderline, calling a cab, waiting for over half an hour and giving up and getting in my car.

not for a few years tho.

tylersmayhem10:41 am 23 Dec 08

Hell yes. I had many a good chuckle reading that column. Plus, the fear that my mum and her gossipy friends read it too stopped me from imbibing too many lagers on those dark nights when I was the designated dork.

I remember when I was done about 10 years ago. My folks put the big guilt trip on me, and my Dad even went as far as to say he lost a couple of clients because of it (he owned his own business – and he was just trying to impress the point on me).

My response was that their clients and friends are a bunch of busybody ***ts, who should mind their own business (and I still believe that). I remember the joy my mum used to get reading the DUI notices and gossip about who did what and when. That came to a screaming halt when I was done. The effectiveness of this naming and shaming is relative to those involved. I still believe that many of those doing the DUI won’t care, or they have plenty worse things to worry about that that.

Maybe what we need is the process used in many US states. HUGE fines (thousands), HUGE periods of the road, extended alcohol counselling and tougher penalties for repeat offenders. When I was getting prepared for court, I was worried about gaol time or something big time like that. When I settled in the courtroom for the morning, seeing SO many people getting done for their 3 or 4th offences, and just getting higher fines and extra time off the road was a f**king joke. 2nd offence should equal 5 year driving ban I think!

It would be interesting to see more detailed stats. on the figures
eg ages, where they were going from & to & reasons why.
It may help with formulating strategies to stop/discourage d/driving.
I suspect that your previous comments are correct though – who wants to spend $50 on a cab.
I have a station wagon with a mattress in the back for those occassions I’m over – which I think is ok – anyone know the legalities of sleeping in the back of a wagon?

p1 said :

West Jamo did until recently. I don’t know if it still existed since the borg took over.

resistance is futile!

West Jamo did until recently. I don’t know if it still existed since the borg took over.

Do any of the clubs here have a bus?

There needs to be a push for ACTION to run late night services on Friday and Saturday nights. In my opinion, this would solve many of these drink driving problems. Living in Gungahlin, I rarely go out on the town because $50-$60 is a lot of money to spend for a trip back home and frankly, I’d rather spend that on booze and get pissed at home with friends.

“Bring back the public shaming column in the Canberra Times!”

That might stop them doing it again – and embarrass some of them – but it doesn’t really help at 2am when they’re pished and want to get home. The practical solutions are the night bus (why oh why don’t they have them here), cheaper taxis and the engine immobiliser.

The increase in busts is clearly as a result of more RBTs but it also shows how easy it’s been in Canberra to drink drive in the past. I think people are getting the message now though.

Growling Ferret said :

Bring back the public shaming column in the Canberra Times!

Hell yes.

I had many a good chuckle reading that column. Plus, the fear that my mum and her gossipy friends read it too stopped me from imbibing too many lagers on those dark nights when I was the designated dork.

peterh said :

… might fall off the wagon this holiday, won a bottle of moet…

Peterh, don’t you dare fall off that wagon!! Now hand it over ….

*chuckle*

peterh said :

BerraBoy68 said :

That’s it, no drinks for you Peterh…

I had my kids education pinned to that invention!

and you still haven’t realised that I have been sober for 2-years….

might fall off the wagon this holiday, won a bottle of moet…

Moet?! I’ll be round at 6:30. Don’t start without me….

tylersmayhem9:25 am 23 Dec 08

I agree with making night buses a frequent and permanent service in Canberra!

I’ve been breath tested several times this year, and at different times of the day – hence “random” testing. I’ve even been tested on the way to work on a Tuesday morning. Had it been years earlier, I would have been done after having a big one on a Monday.

If drink driving is on the rise, the police are obviously doing something right, and while their time and locations of tests can often be questioned on here with mindless “quota” fact – they probably have some very solid data and trends they use to decide when and where.

Don’t drink and drive! If you don’t give at s**t about your own safety, at least think about other you are putting a risk. If that still doesn’t convince you, keep in mind that if you happen to hurt or kill someone while drink driving, you’ll go to prison. $50 cab fare doesn’t seem so bad then eh?!

BerraBoy68 said :

That’s it, no drinks for you Peterh…

I had my kids education pinned to that invention!

and you still haven’t realised that I have been sober for 2-years….

might fall off the wagon this holiday, won a bottle of moet…

That’s it, no drinks for you Peterh…

I had my kids education pinned to that invention!

BerraBoy68 said :

How about someone invents a breatheliser that disables the ignition if the driver is over the limit? (I Dibs the IP)

Parents could install it in their kids cars.

you are a bit slow, saw this in the US on a telecon link – talking about networking and GPS / Sat comms….

graphic ads. lots of blood. actual photos of accident scenes and the carnage. amazing how drink driving seems to just get pictures of people being arrested. what about the dui drivers that have killed innocents?

cube em all!

How about someone invents a breatheliser that disables the ignition if the driver is over the limit? (I Dibs the IP)

Parents could install it in their kids cars.

Even if we executed people who were busted there would still be idiots out there who thought they wouldn’t get caught.

The only way is to make sure the chances of getting caught are much higher than they are now.

Perhaps we can employ public servants to do both the breath check and the vehicle check at the same time – and have only one or two real coppers doing the processing of the idiots. If it’s good enough for parking and speeding offences why not drink driving?

I’m with the cheap fares idea. Hell, I’d even go a shuttle bus or nightrider service. Otherwise that’s $80 gone on a taxi alone. $80 can buy me a lot of booze.

Clown Killer8:53 am 23 Dec 08

I doubt that there’s actually any more drunks out on the roads than usual. The increased figures is likely to represent an outcome of the AFPs targetted approach to breath testing.

Growling Ferret8:46 am 23 Dec 08

Bring back the public shaming column in the Canberra Times!

Make people watch an autopsy of a car crash victim. We were made to do this when I was in the Navy in the 80’s. It certainly left a lasting impression.

Maybe if the AFP got off their a$$es and did breath testing at times/locations where the likelyhood of catching offenders was high, then people would take it seriously and stop doing it. In the past 8 years I haven’t been breath tested once and I drive alot for my job at all hours.

I used to live in Jerra and I would have been breath tested at least 15 times in the 2 years I lived there.

Perhaps they are catching more people because they are starting to get their act together?

Make cab fares cheaper and run more late night bus services so people will be less inclined to “risk it”. In a pissed state, saving $50 odd bucks by driving home instead of taking a cab seems like a good idea.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.