Last chance to drink drive under the old laws

pepmeup said :

I also Agree that having a spread population like Canberra with poor public Transport does not help. But that is not a good enough excuse to break the law and endanger people.

Maybe you need to change your point of view. Rather than looking at lack of public transport as an ‘excuse’ maybe you need to look at it as a problem that can be rectified? Sure, its easy to always blame people rather than actually look at the situation, but what does that achieve, other than adding a bit of extra money to the ACT budget, and cancellng the licence of someone who wont stop driving on the roads anyway.

People will go into the city to drink. People will need to get home at the end of the night. Even for those who try to do the right thing and catch public transport, the options are minimal, so they figure they can risk being assaulted in the city, or risk getting pulled over on the way home. Unfortunately, the risk of being assaulted is higher in the ACT.

PedroPJ said :

Stanhope says that Canberra has a higher rate of DUI offences in comparison to other jurisdictions because Canberrans have a “complete lack of regard for not only their own safety on the road but of all other road users.”

Clearly it has nothing to do with woeful public transport and the inability to get a cab after midnight without waiting for 3 hours and/or being assaulted…

If you have to wait 3 hrs for a cab after midnight there is something wrong with you. I have never waited more than 10-15 mins for a cab in the CBD. The art is to not stand where every other clown does

I think there will be a problem achieving the 0.00 limit, being the way our digestive system works.

In the mining and resources sector there’d be close to 20,000 people nationally who are breath tested every morning before they start work. I’d wager that there wouldn’t be any cases of people exceeding the mandated 0.00 limit who weren’t on the grog the night before.

I agree with jethro, there is just not enough testing done in Canberra, so people believe the risk of getting caught is very low. So more people do drink drive, I also Agree that having a spread population like Canberra with poor public Transport does not help. But that is not a good enough excuse to break the law and endanger people.

on a side note, its classic that the ad below this is for a criminal law firm that will represent drink drivers

I think there will be a problem achieving the 0.00 limit, being the way our digestive system works.

PedroPJ said :

Stanhope says that Canberra has a higher rate of DUI offences in comparison to other jurisdictions because Canberrans have a “complete lack of regard for not only their own safety on the road but of all other road users.”

Clearly it has nothing to do with woeful public transport and the inability to get a cab after midnight without waiting for 3 hours and/or being assaulted…

That might partly explain why the ACT’s drink driving rate is higher than other jurisdictions. However, I would contend that the main reason why ACT drivers are testing at the higher rate is because of the territory’s crappy testing regime. A number of posters have commented on how little they have ever been tested here. I have been here for 2 years and have only been tested once… driving out of Civic at midnight on a Friday.

Testing in Canberra only seems to occur at ‘peak times’ for drink drivers.

In Brisbane I was tested at least 4 or 5 times a year – often at odd times, like 11am on a Tuesday morning, or 4pm on a Monday afternoon.

If other places have testing regimes like this it has two effects:

1. People are less likely to drink and drive because they know there is a higher chance of getting caught – no matter what time or day.

2. the rate of people getting caught drinking is going to be lower than here, because there will be less drunk drivers at 11am on a Tuesday morning than at midnight on a Friday night.

If the ACT government actually gave a rat’s about road safety they would have a more thorough testing regime. As it is, most drink drivers here would know that they can drink drive and will only face a very slight chance of getting caught.

Pork Hunt, you won’t see one. The amount of alcohol in cough medicine, Christmas cake, liqueur chocolates etc is insufficient to raise the blood alcohol level – unless you were using those substances to deliberately try and get intoxicated. Let’s say you had a dose of cough medicine, then immediately got into the car and at the end of your street were pulled over for a random breath test. That test may come up positive (on account of residual alcohol in your mouth), but the follow up test 30 minutes later wouldn’t.

LSWCHP, as a rough guide – if you feel hung over, there’s a good chance your still above 0.000.

The new changes look good – I particularly like the tightening up of access to restricted licenses.

What I don’t buy is the argument run by Standope that ACT drivers go DUI at twice the rate of other cities. This seems a tad spurious given the fact that he’s made statements before about the ACT Policing policy of specifically targeting known drink-driving trouble spots. Assuming that policy was successful then you would expect to be getting a better bang for your buck – in this case a higher strike rate of drivers who are DUI.

Stanhope is an un-mitigated twit.

Compared with NSW, ACT police bother to target it. NSW police assiduously avoid antagonising licensed premises. Kickback anyone?

Two. The ACT has FEW arterial roads; unlike a chaotic urban design, there are no “side streets” one can avail oneself of.

Once again, an ABJECT TWIT!

All licences should have a ZERO limit.

The zero limit for those supervising learner drivers is a wank. I’m currently teaching my teenage daughter to drive. We certainly don’t want pissed people teaching young folks bad habits right from the off, but how the hell am I supposed to know if my BAC is precisely at 0.00 at any give moment? Last Friday night I had a couple of glasses of wine with dinner and a nightcap before bed, then took her driving for an hour on Saturday morning. I certainly had no sense of being affected by alcohol while in the vehicle with her, but how do I know for sure?

Other than that, all good. In a few months time my daughter will be on the road by herself. I’ve spent some time lying on the wreckage of a vehicle with blood pissing all over the place, and I don’t want that to happen to her. I want her to be safe, and the more drunks we keep off the road the happier I’ll be.

cross said :

0.0 is a bit harsh for P plates considering you have to have them until your 20. Aren’t provisional licenses intended as a learning period,are we going to have a rash of 20 year olds who are all of a sudden allowed 0.05 with not the slightest of experience.This only punishes responsible teenagers because the irresponsible don’t give a shit about 0.02 limits. Or is this just a precursor to 0.0 for everybody.
Oh well there goes holy communion.

When I had my Victorian P’s we had a limit of 0.0 for three years and it was simple, if I wanted to drive, no alcohol ….. period. I managed to do this without any issues. I don’t see it as harsh, it is common sense and inexperienced drivers should not be driving with any alcohol on board and 0.0 takes the guess work out of “am I over, or not”

I think it’s a despicable act when someone gets behind the wheel when over the limit, they have no regard for anyone on the road.

PedroPJ just about nailed it. I see a whole bunch of new laws and penalties to try and stop drink driving, but I see nothing constructive?

I wonder if Stanhope would try to train a dog by hitting it and not rewarding it with treats? Its all well and good to say dont drive your car, just have an early night (like all you public servants should) and catch the last bus home at 9:30pm, or if you insist on being out late, then pay the taxi penalty fee, if you can find one.

amarooresident3 said :

And I don’t care if there is no public transport and you have to wait 8 hours for a cab. There is no excuse to drink and drive.

So, you choose to bury your head in the sand, and rather than fixing the problem, you just increase penalties. No-one is saying that lack of options an excuse for drinking and driving, but it is a reason why people do it. Maybe if people tried to solve the problem rather than just crying out how bad it is, then the problem might start to decrease?

The government obviously understands this issue, given the availability of Nightrider buses over Christmas time, but for some reason making those buses available to stop drink-driving all year round, has been deemed not to be a good idea. Sure, it wont stop DUI 100% but if there are simple solutions such as giving people another option to get home, is that not worth the lives that it would save, even if the taxis might lose a bit of money?

Wasn’t the original choice to reduce BAC from 0.05 to 0.02 (rather than zero) to allow for things such as cough medicines, grandma’s preserves, naughty desserts, holy communion etc?

Perhaps a stronger message from the courts when offenders are caught is more useful as a deterrent???

Can’t wait for the first cough medicine defence to front up in court…

toriness said :

not that i drive very often or drink-drive but in the ten years in canberra i haven’t been breathalyzed once. and have only been a passenger in a car where the driver has been breathalyzed twice. what’s the point of having super-duper laws that aren’t enforced?

You may have missed the point. These tougher laws are being put in place because many people are being caught. You may not have been breath tested, but obviously many are being tested, and many are failing.

amarooresident3 said :

PedroPJ said :

Stanhope says that Canberra has a higher rate of DUI offences in comparison to other jurisdictions because Canberrans have a “complete lack of regard for not only their own safety on the road but of all other road users.”

Clearly it has nothing to do with woeful public transport and the inability to get a cab after midnight without waiting for 3 hours and/or being assaulted…

You missed out “some” before “Canberrans” from the quote which changes the context a bit don’t you think?

And I don’t care if there is no public transport and you have to wait 8 hours for a cab. There is no excuse to drink and drive.

You can’t disagree that the woeful public transport options don’t significantly contribute to the DUI rate.

It doesn’t matter if you agree with it or not, that’s the reason for a higher DUI rate, not a higher ratio of irresponsible people. Sydney has just as many dumb people as Canberra, if not more.

0.0 is a bit harsh for P plates considering you have to have them until your 20. Aren’t provisional licenses intended as a learning period,are we going to have a rash of 20 year olds who are all of a sudden allowed 0.05 with not the slightest of experience.This only punishes responsible teenagers because the irresponsible don’t give a shit about 0.02 limits. Or is this just a precursor to 0.0 for everybody.
Oh well there goes holy communion.

Who are people blaming for not being able to get home after a night on the sauce? The taxi line is too long, there are no buses… get over it and make other arrangements since you know the problems or even better do something to fix the problems.

Here’s a strange idea, how about you become responsible for yourself and your actions. That’s right kiddies – time to grow up. Oh no! My human rights to drink and have fun are being oppressed…

PedroPJ said :

Stanhope says that Canberra has a higher rate of DUI offences in comparison to other jurisdictions because Canberrans have a “complete lack of regard for not only their own safety on the road but of all other road users.”

Clearly it has nothing to do with woeful public transport and the inability to get a cab after midnight without waiting for 3 hours and/or being assaulted…

You missed out “some” before “Canberrans” from the quote which changes the context a bit don’t you think?

And I don’t care if there is no public transport and you have to wait 8 hours for a cab. There is no excuse to drink and drive.

not that i drive very often or drink-drive but in the ten years in canberra i haven’t been breathalyzed once. and have only been a passenger in a car where the driver has been breathalyzed twice. what’s the point of having super-duper laws that aren’t enforced?

Stanhope says that Canberra has a higher rate of DUI offences in comparison to other jurisdictions because Canberrans have a “complete lack of regard for not only their own safety on the road but of all other road users.”

Clearly it has nothing to do with woeful public transport and the inability to get a cab after midnight without waiting for 3 hours and/or being assaulted…

I hear Kool Mints are all the rage these days anyway: http://ausm.tv/18

p1 said :

Me no fry said :

…ignoring things like body mass, sex, physical condition, glass sizes, varying alcohol contents of various drinks and so on.

Does having sex make your blood alcohol higher or lower?

Blow in a bag and find out.

p1 said :

Me no fry said :

…ignoring things like body mass, sex, physical condition, glass sizes, varying alcohol contents of various drinks and so on.

Does having sex make your blood alcohol higher or lower?

Depends on whether or not you drink while on the job (so to speak).

Me no fry said :

…ignoring things like body mass, sex, physical condition, glass sizes, varying alcohol contents of various drinks and so on.

Does having sex make your blood alcohol higher or lower?

Only 10 more days? Right, I’m on it – I’ve just chugged a bottle of Stoli, will grab a few tinnies and a cask of wine and then hit the road.

Actually, I reckon you have way more chance of being pinged for speeding than being done for drink-driving – cos, you know, they have to stop you to test your breath. Oh, and the last time I was breath-tested in the ACT was in December 1988 – yes, 22 years ago, and it’s not like I don’t drive much. Since moving to NSW I’ve been breath-tested twice.

While I support these changes (it’s good to see them targetting a real cause of road trauma for a change) I think that the public education on drink-driving has been misleading in the past. I’m thinking about the “standard drinks” measure – people tend to take this as gospel, ignoring things like body mass, sex, physical condition, glass sizes, varying alcohol contents of various drinks and so on.

Perhaps what they should be saying is, if you plan to drink anything at all then you really should plan not drive. That’s what I do now – drinkee, no drivey, drivey, no drinkee – and I decide before going out which one it’s going to be.

The only concern I have is with the zero BAC – I’m not sure that’s entirely workable or fair, given the role alcohol can play in food preparation. 0.02 is so close to zero I think they should stick to that.

I do admit that this is pretty much the only news I access about Canberra, but I agree a little bit of things like a mail out might have been nice. Not that it really changes things for me, but fr P-platers it certainly does.

so as a Provisional licence holder I have no problem with the new 0.00 BAC limit (although I think it’s a bit hard a times to judge whether you think you are at 0.00 compared to perhaps a little over…. but anyhoo)

Was the ACT Govt. going to actually notify those affected of these changes? I know in NSW when the same changes were brought in they wrote to all those affected to ensure there was no ‘Sorry officer I didn’t know’ excuses. I mean, I know they have my address to do this…

Why has this not been done earlier? Maybe because Hargraves was Police then Transport Minister?