Jump to content
Francis Albert

Scottish Drink Drving Law

Recommended Posts

Hairdryer
On 16/05/2019 at 17:51, jonnothejambo said:

Anyone having an alcoholic drink then getting behind the wheel should be banned for life and jailed. 

 

My wife's brother was killed by a drunk driver in the 1970s and back then the sentence that piece of trash got was derisory. 

 

 

Spot on drink drivers destroy lifes also random breath tests would be a deterrent as this may make a person who is this way inclined to think again 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
132goals1958
On 16/05/2019 at 17:23, Dannie Boy said:

Should never have changed it imo. Just like minimum alcohol pricing it’s had no effect. In fact the consumption of alcohol went up after it was introduced. 

 

Consumption not be done about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
muldoon74

Used to have a couple of pints with lunch if we, were out for a Sunday drive or whatever and be OK. 

 

When new law introduced decided it wasn't worthwhile having half a pint so now have a proper coke/Pepsi. Hate diet juice. 

 

Don't even miss it anymore, I'll wait till we get home if I want a drink. 

 

It's just not worth it. I drive for a living so if I ha e a couple of pints, with lunch and I get crashed into (not my fault) , I'm still losing my livelihood and license. 

 

Tbh, minimum unit pricing has, annoyed me more.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Francis Albert

Some posts remind me of an old joke by the late Dave Allen. It went something like "Statistics show that alcohol is involved in 20% of road accidents. In other words 80% are related to sobriety. Let's get these sober feckers off the roads". Allen wasn't crude enough to say the last bit but that was the gist of it. Of course it was just a joke and the conclusion was irrational but no more so than some of the posts on this thread. Someone tragically died 50 years ago due to drink driving so there should be a zero limit with imprisonment for those caught.

I am perfectly willing to forgo a glass of wine with a meal but I'd like a law exposing me to imprisonment for doing so to be based on some rational criteria rather than raw emotion, fuelled by what seems sometimes to me a puritanical view about the evil of drink.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
doctor jambo
7 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Some posts remind me of an old joke by the late Dave Allen. It went something like "Statistics show that alcohol is involved in 20% of road accidents. In other words 80% are related to sobriety. Let's get these sober feckers off the roads". Allen wasn't crude enough to say the last bit but that was the gist of it. Of course it was just a joke and the conclusion was irrational but no more so than some of the posts on this thread. Someone tragically died 50 years ago due to drink driving so there should be a zero limit with imprisonment for those caught.

I am perfectly willing to forgo a glass of wine with a meal but I'd like a law exposing me to imprisonment for doing so to be based on some rational criteria rather than raw emotion, fuelled by what seems sometimes to me a puritanical view about the evil of drink.

There are masses of stats about alcohol consumption and road accidents .

your post is contrarian shit.

the message from govt is clear, the level is now as low as can be realistically enforced ,

the message clear - don’t drink and get behind the wheel- even one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
muldoon74
8 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Some posts remind me of an old joke by the late Dave Allen. It went something like "Statistics show that alcohol is involved in 20% of road accidents. In other words 80% are related to sobriety. Let's get these sober feckers off the roads". Allen wasn't crude enough to say the last bit but that was the gist of it. Of course it was just a joke and the conclusion was irrational but no more so than some of the posts on this thread. Someone tragically died 50 years ago due to drink driving so there should be a zero limit with imprisonment for those caught.

I am perfectly willing to forgo a glass of wine with a meal but I'd like a law exposing me to imprisonment for doing so to be based on some rational criteria rather than raw emotion, fuelled by what seems sometimes to me a puritanical view about the evil of drink.

 

This is my perception of the SNP.. They seem to want to wage a war on drink. 

 

Obviously there are those who will habitually drink drive and no amount of limits on the rest of us are going to stop them. 

 

Same with minimum unit pricing. There are those that would habitually go to their local corner shop and buy 3 litres of gut rot chemical cider swill for £2.99. they had/have a problem. now the same stuff is £12.  So are they going to pay £12 for 3lt of shite? or are they going to look to the let and buy the shop own brand vodka at £13?  Jakeys do the value for effect equation very well. (Worth noting the price of wines that those that can afford it hasn't changed. This tells me it's a war on the poor.)

 

As for drink driving, I do feel now it's quite a hardline approach (however as in previous reply, I've taken myself out of the equation). It's an infringement on peoples rights, but those same people should have the nouse to be able to cope and adjust. Of course, everyone else has the right to get into a car and make it home without being rammed of the road by some pissed up idiot. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Francis Albert
Posted (edited)
38 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

There are masses of stats about alcohol consumption and road accidents .

your post is contrarian shit.

the message from govt is clear, the level is now as low as can be realistically enforced ,

the message clear - don’t drink and get behind the wheel- even one.

I am not sure what in my post you suggest is "contrarian shit" unless you read my quote of Dave Allen's joke as my opinion.

I was responding to suggestions that the limit should be zero and people imprisoned if they breach it.

And the message from the UK and Scottish Governments about how low the limit should be are contradictory. (And to be consistent with the message the limit should be lower than the Scottish limit, which would not for most people be triggered by one drink).

As I said I am perfectly willing to accept as low a limit as is justified by stats (as low as in Scotland or lower still) - not necessarily even "masses of stats". And to err on the side of caution in setting the limit.

 

Edited by Francis Albert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Governor Tarkin
1 hour ago, muldoon74 said:

(Worth noting the price of wines that those that can afford it hasn't changed. This tells me it's a war on the poor.)

 

I was under the impression that it was because more expensive wines already met minimum pricing guidelines that no change was legally required.

 

I don't think it's a war on the poor at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Francis Albert
15 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

I was under the impression that it was because more expensive wines already met minimum pricing guidelines that no change was legally required.

 

I don't think it's a war on the poor at all.

I think the point was that excessive alcohol assumption is not just an issue among poorer people who drink cheap booze. Richer, particularly older, people are also an issue and the minimum unit pricing doesn't touch them. I don't know if Scotland just doesn't have the power to set differential duty generally or would just find higher duty on say single malt whisky politically more difficult than targeting Buckfast drinkers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ri Alban
1 hour ago, doctor jambo said:

There are masses of stats about alcohol consumption and road accidents .

your post is contrarian shit.

the message from govt is clear, the level is now as low as can be realistically enforced ,

the message clear - don’t drink and get behind the wheel- even one.

:clap:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ri Alban
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

I think the point was that excessive alcohol assumption is not just an issue among poorer people who drink cheap booze. Richer, particularly older, people are also an issue and the minimum unit pricing doesn't touch them. I don't know if Scotland just doesn't have the power to set differential duty generally or would just find higher duty on say single malt whisky politically more difficult than targeting Buckfast drinkers.

Buckie's about 8 and a hauf quid a bottle. I'm glad my cider went up. I could grab a bottle of Tesco cider for £2 a bottle. Even at a fiver a bottle it's pretty good and now I drink less.

And here's hoping the NHS might see a wee bit less stress on it. 

 

We can at least give a chance.

Edited by ri Alban

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Longshanks

What annoys me about the minimum alcohol pricing is that it isn't a tax.  It's direct profit for the supermarkets and they are lapping it up right now in Scotland, if it was a tax I would actually support it but all it achieves is it makes me give Morrisons more profit for a case of tennents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Governor Tarkin
10 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

I think the point was that excessive alcohol assumption is not just an issue among poorer people who drink cheap booze. Richer, particularly older, people are also an issue and the minimum unit pricing doesn't touch them. I don't know if Scotland just doesn't have the power to set differential duty generally or would just find higher duty on say single malt whisky politically more difficult than targeting Buckfast drinkers.

 

A&E and police cells tend not to be overstretched of a weekend by whisky connoiseurs or or folk who enjoy a few too many bottles of decent wine each week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Governor Tarkin
4 minutes ago, Longshanks said:

What annoys me about the minimum alcohol pricing is that it isn't a tax.  It's direct profit for the supermarkets and they are lapping it up right now in Scotland, if it was a tax I would actually support it but all it achieves is it makes me give Morrisons more profit for a case of tennents.

 

Aye that pisses me off too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Francis Albert
Just now, Governor Tarkin said:

 

A&E and police cells tend not to be overstretched of a weekend by whisky connoiseurs or or folk who enjoy a few too many bottles of decent wine each week.

But hospital wards and operating theatres have plenty of 50 plus year olds with alcohol-related diseases using up scarce resources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Governor Tarkin
32 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

But hospital wards and operating theatres have plenty of 50 plus year olds with alcohol-related diseases using up scarce resources.

 

That's as may be, but to cast minimum alcohol pricing as some sort of 'war on the poor' is hyperbole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Francis Albert
12 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

That's as may be, but to cast minimum alcohol pricing as some sort of 'war on the poor' is hyperbole.

I agree  and I didn't describe it as such

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Governor Tarkin
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

I agree  and I didn't describe it as such

 

:lol:

 

You did well to fashion a point to argue out of thin air once again, FA.

 

You're some caper, buddy. 👍

Edited by Governor Tarkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jonnothejambo
3 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

Some posts remind me of an old joke by the late Dave Allen. It went something like "Statistics show that alcohol is involved in 20% of road accidents. In other words 80% are related to sobriety. Let's get these sober feckers off the roads". Allen wasn't crude enough to say the last bit but that was the gist of it. Of course it was just a joke and the conclusion was irrational but no more so than some of the posts on this thread. Someone tragically died 50 years ago due to drink driving so there should be a zero limit with imprisonment for those caught.

I am perfectly willing to forgo a glass of wine with a meal but I'd like a law exposing me to imprisonment for doing so to be based on some rational criteria rather than raw emotion, fuelled by what seems sometimes to me a puritanical view about the evil of drink.

 

You are obviously referring to my earlier post regarding my wife losing her 15 year old brother to a drunk driver. It's not raw emotion FA. Just the simple fact that he never got the opportunity to live his life due to an irresponsible person who got behind the wheel after drinking, and that is a terrible thing for any family to endure. 

 

I would not wish that upon anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FinnBarr Saunders
5 hours ago, Longshanks said:

What annoys me about the minimum alcohol pricing is that it isn't a tax.  It's direct profit for the supermarkets and they are lapping it up right now in Scotland, if it was a tax I would actually support it but all it achieves is it makes me give Morrisons more profit for a case of tennents.

 

I get a 20% discount from my work for 2 days after my 4 weekly pay day which meant I could pick up a litre of Glens for about £14.50 so I'd stock up a bit. No more though, I still get my discount but not for alcohol. Nowadays I'll stock up when we visit the wifes family in Ashington.

PS. Morrisons at the Scottish end of Berwick always has very little vodka, it'll be all them from Eyemouth and the likes snaffling it all

 

:vrface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hairdryer
22 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

Some posts remind me of an old joke by the late Dave Allen. It went something like "Statistics show that alcohol is involved in 20% of road accidents. In other words 80% are related to sobriety. Let's get these sober feckers off the roads". Allen wasn't crude enough to say the last bit but that was the gist of it. Of course it was just a joke and the conclusion was irrational but no more so than some of the posts on this thread. Someone tragically died 50 years ago due to drink driving so there should be a zero limit with imprisonment for those caught.

I am perfectly willing to forgo a glass of wine with a meal but I'd like a law exposing me to imprisonment for doing so to be based on some rational criteria rather than raw emotion, fuelled by what seems sometimes to me a puritanical view about the evil of drink.

Try telling all that rubbish to someone who has lost a family member or friend to drink driving 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bridge of Djoum
On 16/05/2019 at 17:57, Smithee said:

 

I think they use a portable swab test roadside then take urine or blood back at the station. 

 

On 16/05/2019 at 18:12, Smithee said:

You might think I have reason to know this, but just an educated guess, I don't drive.

Image result for riiight gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Smithee
37 minutes ago, Bridge of Djoum said:

 

Image result for riiight gif

Lend me your car and I'll prove it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bridge of Djoum
Just now, Smithee said:

Lend me your car and I'll prove it

Would do mate but It's sitting upside down in the Gowanus Canal right now. 

 

Had a few last night, missed the bend. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Smithee
2 minutes ago, Bridge of Djoum said:

Would do mate but It's sitting upside down in the Gowanus Canal right now. 

 

Had a few last night, missed the bend. 

Funny you say that, boy at my work was telling me there was a car found in a pond in a park in Grangemouth this morning :laugh:

Ah the Scottish eh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bridge of Djoum
Just now, Smithee said:

Funny you say that, boy at my work was telling me there was a car found in a pond in a park in Grangemouth this morning :laugh:

Ah the Scottish eh?

Some boays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Francis Albert
2 hours ago, Hairdryer said:

Try telling all that rubbish to someone who has lost a family member or friend to drink driving 

I suppose it is too much to ask what you mean by "that rubbish". I was responding to a number of suggestions that anyone found with a trace of alcohol in their blood should be banned for life and imprisoned. Now if someone is caught doing 31 mph in a 30 mph zone should the same rule apply? 

For some reason speeding seems still to be socially acceptable. Almost every driver does it routinely and If "caught" sympathy still seems to be the norm. Why is that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bobsharp
On 16/05/2019 at 13:21, Lemongrab said:

A bit off topic, but...I driving down towards Oxgangs police station on my way to work yesterday, and saw a police officer with a speedcam down the road. I wasn't doing over 30 when I passed her, but was worried she might have caught me earlier,  as it's easy to pick up speed going down there. 

 

Today driving to work, she was there again. A ****ing cardboard cut-out. :facepalm:

 

 The RCMP had one of these at a school zone near us recently, it was stolen and never recovered after about an hour on duty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×