Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3

Original poster

AIBU to think that if the legal alcholol limit is 80 milligrams for driving...

53 replies

bbcessex · 29/07/2016 14:12

if a man or woman caused a fatal accident and was found to have, eg, 79 milligrams in their blood, you wouldn't say "it was just a tragic accident" then?

There has been a few threads about drinking and driving recently (predominantly about driving DC). I never, ever have a drink if I'm going to drive, and I do now monitor what I drink the night before driving too.

I'm really surprised and quite horrified by those of you who think having a drink and then driving is ok.

I know I'd judge the driver to hell and back if they were (otherwise not negligent) but found to have significant alcohol in their blood, even if they are under the limit. Would I be unreasonable?

OP posts:

IcedVanillaLatte · 29/07/2016 15:41

I'm not saying it's ridiculous to have zero tolerance for drinking and driving. I'm saying it's ridiculous to have a specified BAC limit of zero. I wasn't saying you were ridiculous, I said you were being ridiculous. And I don't have to have seen and dealt with what you say you've seen and dealt with to have an opinion, thanks.

In the situation you've mentioned, by the way, the hypothetical punishment scheme I was playing with above would give him three separate punishments:

for causing the accident,
for driving with a medical condition that (presumably) he knew about and shouldn't have been driving with, and
for driving while drunk.

I'm just playing with it, BTW, not saying I'd advocate for implementing it tomorrow. And I'd happily support a very low legal limit.

PersianCatLady · 29/07/2016 15:57

I'm not saying it's ridiculous to have zero tolerance for drinking and driving. I'm saying it's ridiculous to have a specified BAC limit of zero.
I agree because in practice people who have taken certain medicines or eaten certain things will blow a 0.1 because of them.

Think about it the government didn't put a zero figure on the metabolites of cocaine in the new drug driving laws because certain medicines can cause a very low positive reading.

I am all in favour of the drink drive limit being 0.2 but I don't want the police wasting time prosecuting people who have eaten a liqueur chocolate or eaten a lot of bread. I would much rather they concentrate on those who have actually intentionally drunk alcohol.

mathsmum314 · 29/07/2016 16:07

How many people are in accidents where the cause was alcohol but just below the limit? I would if there are even a handful? Unless it is a problem then the nanny state should leave well enough alone.

IcedVanillaLatte · 29/07/2016 16:08

False positives are definitely a thing! I tested positive for cannabis once and I can absolutely sure you I hadn't had any cannabis. It scares me sometimes how much faith people put in drug tests.

IcedVanillaLatte · 29/07/2016 16:08

*assure

MargaretCavendish · 29/07/2016 16:47

True oblomov, but I would find it very difficult to live with myself if I'd run someone over and killed them and then blown 79 at the road side. I would spend the rest of my life torturing myself thinking 'if i'd been able to react a fraction faster'

Me too - but I think that would happen if I hit someone under any circumstances at all. I'm sure you would always second-guess your own actions, decisions and levels of alertness. Once you go down this route it's actually pretty hard to justify driving at all - for most of us it's by far the most likely way for us to directly seriously harm or kill another person.

RortyCrankle · 29/07/2016 16:53

I never used my car when i had one if it was obvious I would be over the limit.

But playing devil's advocate for a moment, if a child runs out into the road and you hit them and then blew over the limit - that automatically goes into drunk driver statistics. Who is to say that child would not have still been hit if you were sober?

flowery · 29/07/2016 17:12

"I would not have a glass of wine at say, 7pm, and drive home at 11:30pm."

Surely a glass of wine at 7pm would have been well and truly metabolised 4.5 hours later, wouldn't it? I am perfectly happy to be wrong so please correct me if I am.

PersianCatLady · 29/07/2016 17:13

False positives are definitely a thing!
Lots of on the spot drug tests (using urine) show positives because of something other that illegal drugs.

Nowadays these kinds of drug tests are mainly used to rule people out and a positive test will require further investigation such as testing the sample using a GCMS in a laboratory.

Mrbluethecatt · 29/07/2016 17:13

As a doctor I don't agree with a limit of zero as it is possible depending on people's body chemistry and whether they are on any medications their body alcohol level could be more than zero.

I live in Scotland and have noticed that the casual pint after work or drink with lunch has fallen by the way.

I personally think that the English limit is too much but Scotland wasn't much better until recently.

I think that there are some people who believe that just because they are under the legally prescribed limit, it doesn't mean they are drink and driving. Drinking any alcohol and driving means that you are drink driving.

thisisafakename · 29/07/2016 17:18

If it was definitely not your fault, ie if the child ran straight out in front of you and there was no way of stopping or even slowing down, then you probably wouldn't be convicted for causing death by dangerous driving. However, you would still be guilty of driving while under the influence and would hopefully get a pretty hefty sentence/ban for that. If I was the judge, I would impose the maximum sentence possible, even if the driver was not convicted of causing the death.

Basically, there is no need to have 'just one' drink if you know you are driving home. And it would not surprise me if a good deal of accidents are caused by drivers under the limit but still under the influence. At least a lower limit would mean that people would be more cautious about drinking at all.

As for medication or false positives, what happens in all the countries with a zero requirement for novice drivers? If people kept testing positive due to circumstances beyond their control, I am sure the law would have changed there. Therefore, I think the breathalyser equipment would not pick up on trace amounts of alcohol that might have formed in the stomach through fermentation. Or if it id, it wouldn't be enough to measure 0.1 and would therefore still count as zero.

PersianCatLady · 29/07/2016 17:49

In Australia where learner drivers (for example) have a 0.00 BAC limit they government give the following advice -

"Some medicines, mouthwashes and food may contain alcohol. You should check labels for alcohol content (sometimes called ethanol). All products containing alcohol can affect your BAC."

So I think that you must have to be seriously careful and ensure that you don't consume any of these things as ignorance is not an excuse.

I think the breathalyser equipment would not pick up on trace amounts of alcohol that might have formed in the stomach through fermentation.
I think you have stated the only sensible conclusion there as to how a 0.00 limit works.

Andrewofgg · 29/07/2016 17:55

If you eat a lot of fruit you can ferment enough alcohol to be measurable - so zero is unworkable. But 80/35 is far too high.

Original poster

bbcessex · 29/07/2016 18:03

flowery I don't know if the wine would or would not have metabolised but I honestly never risk it....

OP posts:

IcedVanillaLatte · 29/07/2016 18:05

False positives are definitely a thing!

Lots of on the spot drug tests (using urine) show positives because of something other that illegal drugs.

Nowadays these kinds of drug tests are mainly used to rule people out and a positive test will require further investigation such as testing the sample using a GCMS in a laboratory.

Tell that to the people who tested me - they also got very put out when I pointed out that the positive opiate result was because of the cocodamol they'd given me an hour earlier… This was the NHS; you'd think they'd know better. No idea why the cannabis test came up positive! The worst of it is that I was in no position to argue - if DP hadn't been there and made them test again, it would have gone down on my medical records that I was a drug user - the positive test result is still on there, presumably, but is obviously a false positive.

PersianCatLady · 29/07/2016 18:30

Tell that to the people who tested me
That is disgusting.

Was it a urine test?

What reason did they give for drug testing you?

The only reason I can think of is that in an ED it might be useful if a patient in unconscious to see if they are intoxicated.

Trills · 29/07/2016 18:36

Are there any posters who would think that the driver was not at fault if they caused an accident at *just under the limit?

Depends on details of the accident.

Lots of drivers in accidents are at fault when they have not drunk anything.

Lots of drivers in accidents are not at fault who are over the limit.

Driving while over the limit does not necessarily mean that any accident you are in is your fault.

It is dangerous and illegal, but that's not the same as automatically at fault.

IcedVanillaLatte · 29/07/2016 19:02

Yep CatLady, a urine test. I was in hospital and they thought I was acting strangely. (I was. Because I was ill.) I think it was DP who pointed out the opiate mistake, actually.

ClumsyFool · 29/07/2016 20:20

I'm either drinking or I'm driving. I don't drive after any alcohol purely for the reason that I can have a fair bit of alcohol and feel fine yet sometimes I can have the smallest amount and feel the effects more than I'd expect and certainly wouldn't be safe behind the wheel, so to rule out the risk I just don't bother.
Plus I drink wine mostly which definitely seems to affect me more than cider or beer.
Not the topic I know, but I also get migraines and often have a period before one comes on where I feel dizzy and spaced out and disorientated/slurry and I wouldn't drive during an episode of that for the same reason that I would potentially be a danger to other people, I actually think I'm more of a risk when I feel like this than if I'd had a glass of wine. I was mentioning this to someone and they seemed to find that odd, which made me think that some people clearly only think of alcohol and drugs as reasons not to drive and not about other ways they may be impaired.

Lurkedforever1 · 29/07/2016 20:59

I don't think the issue is that there are many accidents that could have been prevented if the driver hadn't been just under the limit. I think it's more the case people are drinking one or two and assuming they are under the limit, when they aren't. Or people thinking that as they'll probably just be over the limit they'll be fine. There is a huge variance in how quickly we all metabolise alcohol, and a much lower limit would stop people assuming they are still well within the limits of their reaction time being unaffected, when in actual fact they aren't.

PersianCatLady · 29/07/2016 21:15

I think it was DP who pointed out the opiate mistake
That is unbelievable. (Not you but the fact that they didn't know that).

Had they already asked you if you had taken any drugs? (Don't answer if I am being inappropriate).

IcedVanillaLatte · 29/07/2016 21:35

They had, CatLady, but they didn't believe me.

RortyCrankle · 29/07/2016 21:45

Also, I think an awful lot of people would be shocked if they had a breath test the morning after a heavy night out. Many would still be over the limit.

PersianCatLady · 29/07/2016 21:47

They had, CatLady, but they didn't believe me.
I find that really disrespectful or incompetent.

TroysMammy · 29/07/2016 21:52

If you are driving you shouldn't even have one drink. Although they say don't drink and drive we are then told " but you can drink this amount". Drink affects people differently. I'm not a drinker and have a small frame but I can literally drink a few sips of wine and feel too squiffy to stand up let alone drive a car.

Flip

1 2 3

Swipe left for the next trending thread