Some pollies think drink-drive limit should be 0.02

[ozzypatrol]

its not the people at 0.05 that are the problem its the fuckn retards that just blow the breatho up, fukn knee jerk reactions and some dickhead just wants their name against a change or new law.

[claymen]

The problem is we all see shit like this
P-plater Joanne Grosse records one of the highest blood-alcohol readings | News.com.au

And of course the knee jerk reaction is "lower the limits" because that totally stopped them before. Problem is it's retards like this person who are so far over the limit that lowering the limit does nothing but criminalize the people who were not causing a problem. It's the same attitude they apply to speeding, every year you have someone claiming lowering the limit will save lives because of x number of speeding related accidents..

I'm with barfridge I would like to see the stats on how many accidents were the result of a person being between 0.02 and 0.05. And honestly, the coppers are not given anywhere near enough funding to enforce the current limit let alone lowering it.

How about instead of focusing on crap like this and the same rhetoric about lowering speed limits and get more coppers out there on the road pulling people up for shit driving.

[jackmbee]

Its okay you can all settle down, Uncle Colin has stated that he wont be supporting lowering of the limit.

[T-Rex]

The limit for previously convicted drink drivers = 0.02 as current. To get a "conviction" you have to have been equal to or over 0.08. or have taken a 0.05+ but <0.08 infringement to court and lost.

Drink drivers obviously don't give a shit and will continue to drive drunk / un-licensed / un-insured no matter the limit.

Just like hoon laws, people think they will get away with it despite the huge pineapple they risk.

Time and again it has been proven that the governments actions of lowering limits and increasing fines only inconveniences the previously non problematic drivers while serving as a mere challenge to the hard core offenders.

EG: lowering speed limits due to excessive speeding on certain roads.

[shmoo]

The real issue is that this girl can breed.

The problem is we all see shit like this
P-plater Joanne Grosse records one of the highest blood-alcohol readings | News.com.au

And of course the knee jerk reaction is "lower the limits" because that totally stopped them before. Problem is it's retards like this person who are so far over the limit that lowering the limit does nothing but criminalize the people who were not causing a problem. It's the same attitude they apply to speeding, every year you have someone claiming lowering the limit will save lives because of x number of speeding related accidents..

I'm with barfridge I would like to see the stats on how many accidents were the result of a person being between 0.02 and 0.05. And honestly, the coppers are not given anywhere near enough funding to enforce the current limit let alone lowering it.

How about instead of focusing on crap like this and the same rhetoric about lowering speed limits and get more coppers out there on the road pulling people up for shit driving.

[Mckenzie]

The limit for previously convicted drink drivers = 0.02 as current.

eh? what's this? got a link?

[chew]

The limit for previously convicted drink drivers = 0.02 as current.

eh? what's this? got a link?

Isnt there a time limit on that, say two years after conviction you need to be 0.02 or below?

[bunny87]

They should be either suggesting 0.00% or no change.
It should either be allowable or not.

Agreed.
Honestly, my father is a shocker for drink-driving.
But I hate it with a passion, I've lost several friends because them or the driver was too drunk to drive, though the driver got off with a suspension because he blew under 0.08

Ban drink-driving completely I think. Make it 0.00 across the board, that way noone is more affected than the other.

[Goofy]

Would making the limit 0 stop your father from driving drunk though?

[bunny87]

Would making the limit 0 stop your father from driving drunk though?

he doesn't drink drive on his bike, because he has a 0 limit on that (court enforced)
only in the car because he thinks he's between 0.05 and 0.08

I'm jsut sick of drunk drivers getting off with a 3 month suspension for killing someone just because they're driving within the legal limit.

[Goofy]

If they're driving within the legal limit then they shouldn't get a conviction. Do you perhaps mean that they're between 0.05 and 0.08?

Could your personal issue perhaps be with the applied penalties rather than BAC?

[bunny87]

Personal issues for everyone help to form personal opinions.
So yes, I hate the fact that my friends have been killed through their own stupid fault, or the fault of someone else.
And I'm never going to apologise for having my personal opinion.

On three occassions in the last 12 months
- 2 drivers received a 3-month suspension and a fine for killing 3 passengers because they were under the limit of 0.05
- 1 driver received a court order, and a 9 month suspension for killing 1 passenger with a BAC between 0.05 & 0.08

The penalties are in strict relation to the BAC, so to have any effect on one, the other needs to be changed as well.

The laws need to be tougher. Screw the L&P plate lowered level to 0.02... make everyone be accountable for any alcohol they have in their system, no matter what your age.

[shmoo]

Fine, but the question being posed is that people drink drive regardless of teh laws/penalties, so would making it 0 actually stop those people?

Personal issues for everyone help to form personal opinions.
So yes, I hate the fact that my friends have been killed through their own stupid fault, or the fault of someone else.
And I'm never going to apologise for having my personal opinion.

On three occassions in the last 12 months
- 2 drivers received a 3-month suspension and a fine for killing 3 passengers because they were under the limit of 0.05
- 1 driver received a court order, and a 9 month suspension for killing 1 passenger with a BAC between 0.05 & 0.08

The penalties are in strict relation to the BAC, so to have any effect on one, the other needs to be changed as well.

The laws need to be tougher. Screw the L&P plate lowered level to 0.02... make everyone be accountable for any alcohol they have in their system, no matter what your age.

[Goofy]

I don't have a problem with your personal opinion, I just don't think you're applying it rationally. You know 2 people that received a fine and a 3 month suspension and 1 person who copped a 9 month suspension plus fine for the same offence of reckless driving occasioning death? That's well under the minimum, excuse me if I don't believe you.

Laws should not be written due to an emotional response because they can be irrational.

[bunny87]

Laws should not be written due to an emotional response because they can be irrational.

I can see where you're coming from, and that's fine.

It's just frustrating when nothing seems to be able to be done about it. And the reason they got a slap on the wrist because it was a first offence and they had a clear record before that.
They were young, I'll give them that, but still... It's no excuse for killing someone.

The amount of people you see hurt because of drunk, or drink-driving personnel is increasing.
I don't know whether having a full ban will stop those people or not, but if it was a zero ban, and enforced as such... then wouldn't the penalties be in direct correlation?

[The Saint]

The amount of people you see hurt because of drunk, or drink-driving personnel is increasing.

The amount you know about is increasing?

[bunny87]

The amount you know about is increasing?

Probably, as I've been made more aware from circumstances

[The Saint]

I mean: is the number of people drink-driving (per head of population) increasing?
Is the number of people being charged with drink-driving (per head of population) increasing?
Is the number of crashes caused by drink-driving (per head of population) increasing?
Is the number of casualties resulting from said crashes (per head of population) increasing?

I think they're steady.

Any stats demonstrating an increasing trend?

[out_in_front]

What we need is enforcement of the current laws before that sort of decision is made. we have 30ish speed cameras and A heap more lasers, but only 3 booze buses and stuff all cops that set RBT'ing at the side of the road. The really sad fact is that alcohol related incidents cause more fatalities than speed alone.

Look at how many people are caught driving on suspended licenses, and how many ignore the laws completely (well over the limit, well over the speed limit in inappropriate areas, driving tired etc) and realise that changing the law will not do anything if the few people that continually break it already continue to do so.

[claymen]

What we need is enforcement of the current laws before that sort of decision is made. we have 30ish speed cameras and A heap more lasers, but only 3 booze buses and stuff all cops that set RBT'ing at the side of the road. The really sad fact is that alcohol related incidents cause more fatalities than speed alone.

Look at how many people are caught driving on suspended licenses, and how many ignore the laws completely (well over the limit, well over the speed limit in inappropriate areas, driving tired etc) and realise that changing the law will not do anything if the few people that continually break it already continue to do so.

That sums it up quite nicely. Having harsher laws to target those that don't adhere to them in the first place does nothing except make it worse for the rest of the community. It's like banning all guns to stop criminals having them...

And I agree, there is very little being done about drink driving as compared to speeding. The way they treat it you'd think speeding was killing thousands of people a day in Australia. The fact is it costs money to have booze busses out and about and the cops/staff required to man them. A speed camera on the other hand is looked at as a revenue source.