Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Excellence in Public Sector consulting

Recidivist drink drivers

By johnboy 22 March 2011 39

More than a third of people caught drink driving in the past week were repeat offenders; with thirty one people caught in total. Twelve people were caught on Friday (March 18) alone.

A 28-year-old man recorded 0.297, the highest recording for the week. The man is restricted to a 0.00 limit.

A 25-year-old man, on a 0.05 licence, recorded the next highest reading with 0.231; while a 22-year-old female 0.05 licence holder recorded 0.200.

With the ACT road toll at four, Superintendent Mark Colbran is urging the community to support the police message that drinking and driving is unacceptable.

“The fact that we continue to catch repeat offenders tells us those who think it’s ok to drink and drive are just not getting the message.

“I urge anyone who knows someone who drinks and drive to make a stand. Tell them that their actions are unacceptable. Notify the police. We will not tolerate the lives of our friends and family being put in danger,” he said.

[Courtesy ACT Policing]


What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
39 Responses to
Recidivist drink drivers
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
fragge 12:12 pm 24 Mar 11

screaming banshee said :

As far as I am concerned, drink drivers can all f*** off and die. I would be very content with a death penalty for the offence.

Slightly harsh, don’t you think? First of all, when somebody drives drunk, they have made that decision whilst already under the influence of alcohol (which has been shown repeatedly to reduce ones ability to make responsible decisions). Secondly, the percentage of fatal crashes which involve drivers over-the-limit is anywhere from 12.8% (2001 study in the U.S) to 32% (2006 study in Australia), and the percentage (again to quote from American sources here) of people injured in crashes involving drink-driving (versus those involved in crashes where no alcohol is consumed) is between 3.22% and 7%.

Finally, it has been proven that talking on a mobile phone impairs ones ability to drive more so than being under the influence of alcohol, yet I don’t see you up in arms demanding the death penalty for somebody guilty of chatting to their wife about dinner on their way home from work. Maybe you should re-think your apparent propensity for being an alarmist, ignorant arm-chair critic. You want to make a difference, how about instead of offering to kill other human beings for committing benign crimes, you get out and volunteer to be a counsellor to struggling alcoholics and actually help somebody get their life back.

shadow boxer 11:50 am 24 Mar 11

Special G said :

Healthy liver metabolises about 0.025/hour regardless of body weight, sex or hair colour.

Drinks like vodka/red bulls get people in trouble as the large amounts of caffeine mask the alcohol effects to a degree.

Really ? then why is the advice on what you can drink different for women and men

screaming banshee 10:37 am 24 Mar 11

As far as I am concerned, drink drivers can all f*** off and die. I would be very content with a death penalty for the offence.

Me no fry 10:29 am 24 Mar 11

screaming banshee said :

Me no fry said :

It probably isn’t worth taking.

You’ve missed the point me no fry, we don’t want their liver…that goes in the trash. Lets see them down a carton short a liver.

Actually, no I didn’t. I understood quite well what you meant. You really are a banshee, aren’t you?

Special G 8:25 am 24 Mar 11

Healthy liver metabolises about 0.025/hour regardless of body weight, sex or hair colour.

Drinks like vodka/red bulls get people in trouble as the large amounts of caffeine mask the alcohol effects to a degree.

LSWCHP 11:15 pm 23 Mar 11

farnarkler said :

In this discussion nothing of the offender’s friends have been mentioned. Surely the offender isn’t sitting drinking alone and then decides to drive.

What sort of person lets a friend who’s obviously had more than a few get behind the wheel?

Ahhh…I suspect it would be the sort of drunken arsehat friend who has also had several skinfulls with their mate at the club/pub, and has climbed into their car equally pissed and driven off in the other direction because they know they’re drunk but don’t give a shit about the law or the potentially fatal consequences of their actions.

Me and members of my family and our friends have suffered because of drunk drivers. I hate the bastards with a passion.

screaming banshee 11:06 pm 23 Mar 11

Me no fry said :

It probably isn’t worth taking.

You’ve missed the point me no fry, we don’t want their liver…that goes in the trash. Lets see them down a carton short a liver.

farnarkler 8:40 pm 23 Mar 11

In this discussion nothing of the offender’s friends have been mentioned. Surely the offender isn’t sitting drinking alone and then decides to drive.

What sort of person lets a friend who’s obviously had more than a few get behind the wheel?

eily 8:30 pm 23 Mar 11

Jethro said :

eily said :

And how many were repectable people, caught the next morning over (just) the limit after doing the right thing the night before and not driving but thought themselves right to drive after a good nights sleep?

A respectable person would realise that a couple hours sleep doesn’t sober you up. Time does. I don’t drive the next day if I had a really big one the night before.

I’m not talking about the ones who had a bender the night before, just the mum and dad drinkers who only have a couple. But though age/weight/sex etc don’t clear the alcohol from their systems as fast, as in the past,we have been told we do.

How many still believe that two/three in an hour will put you over the limit and one an hour will keep you there. If your one of the unlucky ones, just one will put you over the limit.

And were do they tell us how long it could take to clear our systems.

Some people may take only a couple of hours, some over twelve. There’s a reason pilots can’t have a drink 24 hours before they take to the air.

Someone I know went to a drug/alcohol information course and the number of caught drivers who fell into that category of being over in the morning, and not after a heavy night, were in the majority. Including, he was told, police, lawyers and others who you think would know better.

If they don’t know how much they can drink and how long it takes to leave their systems, what hope do the rest of us have.

And before you go off again; I don’t condone the drivers who knowingly drink drive. Those ones need the book thrown at them. Hanged, drawn and quartered, and whatevers left being made to go out with the ambos and seeing the consequences of their stupidity/idiocy. That might get the point across.

But until we change our ideas about drinking, I very much doubt it.

OpenYourMind 5:41 pm 23 Mar 11

Shadow Boxer I think you are still missing the point. The repeat offender example you use has already taken the decision to put at risk the wife & kids transport and also other people’s lives. The punishment of taking the car is to protect everyone else.

Sure, John Laws (if he was a repeat offender) may not be harmed by losing a car in the same way he probably wouldn’t feel a $1500 fine.

boobook 12:36 pm 23 Mar 11

… public humiliation scheme: couple of pages in the paper and some community service tv ads set aside for publishing photos, names, alcohol levels and number of offences, for second and subsequent offences.

*ducks under desk, anticipating incoming human rights/privacy lecture*

georgesgenitals 12:05 pm 23 Mar 11

shadow boxer said :

You seem to think these are rational, reasonable people who think about the consequences of their actions before they do them.

People who are rational and reasonable generally aren’t recidivists. They might occasionally do the wrong thing, but getting caught multiple times for high range drink driving?

shadow boxer 11:53 am 23 Mar 11

Rawhide Kid Part3 said :

johnboy said :

On the other hand wives might take their husband’s drinking more seriously if it could lost them the car.

Agree

You seem to think these are rational, reasonable people who think about the consequences of their actions before they do them.

The fine for a second or third offence is probably more than the car is worth but that doesn’t stop them. My guess is they do this every week and getting caught occasionaly is just the cost of their lifestyle.

It’s probably only jail that will help but again that’s not a proven deterrent either

Rawhide Kid Part3 11:44 am 23 Mar 11

johnboy said :

On the other hand wives might take their husband’s drinking more seriously if it could lost them the car.

Agree

Rawhide Kid Part3 11:29 am 23 Mar 11

pptvb said :

Make them do community service caring for an incapacitated road accident victim for a week.
Having to wipe a 30yr olds bum might get them to see reality.
Oh, and crush their car.

No…. Sell the cars at auction and the money raised can go into driver education or health or something like that.

Rawhide Kid Part3 11:25 am 23 Mar 11

Spideydog said :

Davo111 said :

Having said that. If you knowingly loan your car to a driver who has no license, then you’re asking for trouble.

Its actually illegal.

True. The owner of the vehicle is responsible for the use of that vehicle unless its is used without their permission.

johnboy 10:51 am 23 Mar 11

On the other hand wives might take their husband’s drinking more seriously if it could lost them the car.

Me no fry 10:48 am 23 Mar 11

screaming banshee said :

Let them keep their car, but take their liver.

It probably isn’t worth taking.

I think that any punishment that involves mandatory confiscation will always end up hurting people other than the intended target.

Instead of taking their cars, take their liberty. Mandatory imprisonment for repeat DUI offenders sounds like a good idea to me – with the length of the sentence increasing for subsequent offences. Just like taking their cars, it might not make them mend their ways in the long term, but at least they can’t drink and drive while in gaol.

EvanJames 10:36 am 23 Mar 11

For recidivist drivers, probably a regime similar to sports people caught taking drugs. The drunk driver is required to present themselves to a police station on a regular basis for a breath test, at a time when they’re most likely to have been drinking.

Or, implement a targeted breath testing programe, set up breath testing stations near their place of residence, or even target those repeat offender drivers for extra testing.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site