Comfortable drink drive limits

[Teapot74]

I do not agree with drink driving. I don't think it's clever to drink the max amount and stay under the limit. I know the ideal is zero. Just trying to work out If my perception of drinking and driving is safe enough. 1 small glass of wine, 2 if it's over a longer period. I know the only way to really find out would be with a breathalyser, just wondering what the general consensus was. I'm not small. I just looked up a breathalyser website and it suggested that 3 large glasses in the evening could put you over in the morning, really???? Maybe if you necked them at 10/11 but if you're drinking over the course of the evening…?

Is the thinking that alcohol is worked out of your system more slowly when you're asleep now out of date?

Or am I imagining remembering it?

I went on a speed awareness course last year. At the beginning of the course you had to write down the "reason" you were speeding (myself- screaming baby in the back distracting me, and going down a steep bank = caught doing 35mph in 30 zone). Later on in the course, the instructor told the harrowing story of a 14 year old who was hit and killed by a driver doing 38mph. As shocked silence fell on the room, he said to read our "reasons" for speeding and consider how we would feel saying them as an excuse to the parent of a 14 year old we had just killed. It really hit home, as obviously there is no excuse.

The same could be applied to drink driving- if you crashed or hit someone that night or the next morning and someone was killed, is there ever any "exvuse" you could tell their family? "I just had one..." "I was at a party with friends" "I was drinking last night but thought it would be ok this morning". For me, the excuses aren't good enough, so I don't put myself in the situation where I would need to use them.

Yes but if you're physically not over the limit? No sane person is suggesting that someone who drinks a bottle of vodka in one night will be safe to driv at 8am but half a bottle or even a bottle of wine?

We have to be scientific about it.

*Spoony do you see how the amount you drink and are happy to drive changes from 1/3rd of a bottle, to a couple of swigs to a couple of mouthfuls?

If you can not even keep track over the course of a post I don't fancy your chances over an evening.*

If I go out and drink as much as one wine glass (not a third of a bottle -- I drink far less than the other two and although it happens occasionally I have more than that, it is rare) it is because my husband or my teenage-too-young-to-drink son is driving, DH and I take it in turn when son is not at home. I do not think about ¼ to a 1/5th of a bottle of wine after three or four hours would be still in my system at all by the time I drove IF I drove having drunk that.

However, If I am driving I have a couple of swigs and am done. Far far less than what small amount I would drink and certainly a lot less than one unit over three or four hours.

If I had drunk a whole one unit it would be clear from my system in way less than three to four hours, it would have been gone for a very long time by morning yet people say that they don't think it is safe to drive the next day after drinking any amount.

I'm also not a small, petite woman, quite the contrary so don't bother using that argument either.

The key phrase between the share-between-three and the few-sips was

"To be honest if I'm driving I don't even have that"

In other words, if I'm not driving it is usual that I'd have less than a third of a bottle. If I am driving it is usual I'd have a couple of sips and call it done. I wasn't lost at all, I think you were though.

The "bullshit" I spout (1 unit an hour plus one from the time you stop drinking) is what is taught in the human physiology section of aviation ground exams. Assuming flying a plane (large heavy dangerous machine which can kill you) roughly equates to driving a car (etc etc which will kill others as well) I find it a good rule of thumb to apply to both situations. If I'm not safe to fly a circuit, I'm not safe to drive to the airfield either.

There's nothing quite as haunting as the memory of someone crying "but I only had the one glass" as her passenger is declared dead. Tends to make you want a zero tolerance.

I have no problem with people drinking. One, two, twenty. But get a taxi, or have a designated sober driver, or use the pub transport home - most of them run a get-you-home-safely service here. Just don't drink and then think you're safe to drive.

I very rarely have anything and drive, my only exception is on the rare occasion I'm at a wedding. I will often have a glass of whatever is being offered on arrival - typically a small glass of fizz at 4pm, and then a couple of gulps of wine with the meal (certainly less than 100ml), so let's say that's 6pm, and then drive home at midnight.

I am more than certain that the amount I drink would be within legal limits anyway, but more so, almost all out of my system by 12/1am.

I have never heard of any pub running transport home.

If you were me, 9 st 8lbs, healthy, and you had a small glass of wine, 125ml, and drove three hours later there would be very little, alcohol in your blood. So if you drove badly or dangerously you would be no better or worse than the people who didn't have a drink and drove badly or dangerously because they had medicine that causes drowsiness or because their baby kept them up all night. Or because they are poor drivers. You would be within the English law. I propose continuing, from time to time (very often I abstain if the wine on offer doesn't look good).

Caryam really? Must be a kiwi thing then, all the major bars run an hourly ish shuttle service around town here :)

Sounds brilliant. In Britain you have to make your own way home. But Britain also has very low levels of drink driving. I suspect a much bigger issue here is people driving when they are too tired to drive.

Hic, there is an 8 hour rule for flying too. So if you have a tsp and fly seven hours later you are breaking the rules, even though there is zero chance that you have any alcohol in you.

My dh bought a breathalyser and was still under the limit after three beers ( he didn't drive though it was just an experiment). I will have a small glass of wine with a meal and have t towards te beginning of the meal.

I don't drink and drive at all. I get my dh to drive instead and he won't drink and drive either.

I don't understand why the ideal limit is zero. If its because that is the safest possible limit, then why doesn't that apply to other areas of driving? The safest possible speed limit on a motorway is certainly less than 70mph. It is safer to drive when you haven't had any caffeine, so do you not have a cuppa if you're driving later? Having music on is less safe, so should we ban radios in cars?

HicDraconis, here in Australia they're called courtesy busses and you just need to book your place on one for a rough time slot going to your area.

On another note, the drink driving laws In Australia are very different, and strange. Law states that for a female: 1 standard drink in the first hour, then 1 standard drink per hour thereafter = safe to drive, for a male: 2 standard drinks in the first hour, then one standard drink per hour = safe to drive. I find it utterly bizarre.

On another side note, I can't remember the exact calculations etc now, but I was taught a formula at university (c2008) using sex, weight, units vs hours (etc) to work out exactly how long it would take you to metabolise alcohol and be below the (former) Scottish drink drive limit, and it did roughly equate to 1hr per unit of alcohol consumed, from the time you stopped drinking (obviously with various variables to take into consideration).

Not sure if my post had much of a point, but there you go.

Exactly, Jessica. And if mobile phones are dangerous if used while driving, perhaps it would be better to ban them from cars full-stop.

I think potentially criminalising behaviour that has hitherto been legal (small glass of wine with a dinner out) can only be done if there is clear proof that this will save lives or prevent injuries. I would be interested in seeing how many drivers found to have been drinking when they caused death or injury had blood alcohol levels at various levels. Because if the vast majority of these have levels two or three times over the current legal level, how on earth would reducing the level further save any more lives/injuries? Yes, you'd prevent people like me having our occasional glass of good wine with a meal out, but we weren't the ones who were presenting the really serious risk in the first place.

Abra1d presumably we'll be able to compare with Scotland on stats once their lower limit has been in force for a while. In fact, are there any other international comparisons which can be made?

Personally I wouldn't drink anything if I was driving the same night. But the whole "morning after" issue really worries me as you could theoretically have two people who drank the same amount the previous night, went to bed at the same time, drove the next day at the same time and one could be over the limit and one not. And, importantly, they would have no way of knowing which was which.

Are the majority of accidents caused by people who are two or three times over the limit as you speculate?

How many accidents are caused by people slightly over or even in between say the current limit in the rest of the UK and Scotlands new limit?

I am asking, not speculating, Scots.
Where are the figures?

But if, say, it were found that most of the people who had caused death or serious injury were men aged 20-40 who were three times over the limit, how would preventing middle-aged women from drinking one glass of wine with their dinner improve matters?

It's 8am here. Last night I drank a bottle of wine and I have a breathalyzer. It's registering 0.00. Ta da!

Scots, presumably the Scottish Government did some sort of research in to this and published the number of accidents which would be averted by lowering the limit, including the number of deaths and injuries which would be prevented?

Like, I think that's what it's coming to...we'll all need personal breathalysers so that we know when we're safe to drive the next day. Otherwise how will you ever know??

Scots - I think inadvertantly you are pointing out the issue - the "if you drink don't drive" is a nice easy message for that night - but as many people here have said, while most people will think they don't 'drink drive' because they get a taxi home, many aren't clear at what point they are then safe to drive again.

Unless you are going to say "don't drive for 24 hours after a glass of wine" then at some point, working out when the effect has worn off is worth thinking about.

I agree the suggestion that you start the clock at the point you finished the last drink is rediculous, of course the body will start processing the alcohol straight away. If I have a unit at 7pm, one at 8pm, one at 9pm and one at 10pm, then I would assume I was safe to drive considerably earlier than if I necked 4 shots at 9:30pm. In both cases, the 'safe' option that night would be to get a taxi home, but it's worth thinking about if I needed to drive the next day, if I'd be safe (I would assume in both cases, it would be fine to drive in the morning).