Have a read of this; whatever your views on drink drive, strikes me as discriminatory for lorry and bus drivers having to conform to a lower limit than anyone else.
Harsher penalty, yes, if you get caught over the limit and you’ve got an HGV or PSV, and so it should be; but a 20ml limit means that many of us will effectively have to be tee-total 7 days a week. As it stands I don’t drink during the week, nor on Sunday night if I’m driving Monday morning, but if this comes in even a pint with me Sunday lunch could well be dodgy; and it begs the question that if I got caught in my car at, say, 45ml, under the normal limit, would the fact that I hold an HGV mean that I’d get banned anyway?
Interfering nanny-state do-gooders out in force yet again . And the answer to the inevitable “so you’d be happy for a drunk driver to kill your mother/daughter/son/father?” is “meh”.
gnasty gnome:
Have a read of this; whatever your views on drink drive, strikes me as discriminatory for lorry and bus drivers having to conform to a lower limit than anyone else.
Harsher penalty, yes, if you get caught over the limit and you’ve got an HGV or PSV, and so it should be; but a 20ml limit means that many of us will effectively have to be tee-total 7 days a week. As it stands I don’t drink during the week, nor on Sunday night if I’m driving Monday morning, but if this comes in even a pint with me Sunday lunch could well be dodgy; and it begs the question that if I got caught in my car at, say, 45ml, under the normal limit, would the fact that I hold an HGV mean that I’d get banned anyway?
It’s a shame that truck/bus/proffessional drivers should face harsher penalties. Personally, as a non-drinker, I couldn’t give a stuff. In fact my feeling is that it should be zero for all, and that would eliminate grey areas that repeatedly catch people who genuinely feel that they are ‘safe-to-drive’. Trouble is, the insurance companies would hate that to happen, 'cos then they’d lose their high premium cash cows
By the way, this is Northern Ireland that the article is referring to, but no reason why it shouldn’t appear over here, though I think we may hear a bit more about it first.
Rob K:
Interfering nanny-state do-gooders out in force yet again . And the answer to the inevitable “so you’d be happy for a drunk driver to kill your mother/daughter/son/father?” is “meh”.
tallyman:
By the way, this is Northern Ireland that the article is referring to, but no reason why it shouldn’t appear over here, though I think we may hear a bit more about it first.
The smoking ban was started in Ireland as an experiment
I read it that the proposed lower limit would apply to ALL those that drive for their job not just LGV/PCV drivers
What I assume is that those caught WHILST doing a job would face harsher limits than they would if they were caught using their own cars so I do not see a problem with that
Although i do believe drink driving is wrong because it effects you’re reactions, unfortunately so does lots of other things that although illegal not enforced to the same level for example I believe the flu (i’ve never had it), screws you up more than a hangover yet people who drive with the flu aren’t going to get banned and then have the rest of their lives without a hire car or a cheap insurance policy. Tiredness and distractions are other things that can cause problems.
I believe that the breath machine should be binned and the sober test re introduced and anyone failing should receive the same punishment no matter if they are drunk, ill or simply too frail to pass. Being banned from driving, having one more beer the night before isn’t sensible but how can you measure it the next day if you aren’t hungover where as being ill is obvious. I personally believe in drink or drive which is why I cycle most places unless I’m working or on the bike.
Overall i don’t believe that being over the limit is any more of a danger than other issues and we shouldn’t make the limit lower but make it simpler for people to calculate and punish the results of drink driving (poor reaction times) not everyone based on the results of clinical trials.
I was reading another thread about this and apparently using many mainstream mouthwashes will now put you over this new drink drive limit. Dunno how true it is, but I think they do have alcohol content in them so it could well be true.
Personally I do think that the lower limit for vocational drivers is indeed discriminatory as mentioned by the OP. What vehicle you’re driving and/or whether you are working at the time makes absolutely no difference. It makes no odds whether you drive head on into someone at 56mph in your truck or car - both outcomes are likely to be the same.
Rob K:
I was reading another thread about this and apparently using many mainstream mouthwashes will now put you over this new drink drive limit. Dunno how true it is, but I think they do have alcohol content in them so it could well be true.
Personally I do think that the lower limit for vocational drivers is indeed discriminatory as mentioned by the OP. What vehicle you’re driving and/or whether you are working at the time makes absolutely no difference. It makes no odds whether you drive head on into someone at 56mph in your truck or car - both outcomes are likely to be the same.
I will check my brown Asthma Preventer spray, it says on it powered by alcohol
You will probally find any vocational licence holder who gets done for dd even if it’s in a car will get invited to tea and biscuits with the commissioner and there vocational entitlement will usually be suspended for an aditional period usually 1 to 3 months after there standard licence is reinstated. So you get treated more harshly any way.
gnasty gnome:
Have a read of this; whatever your views on drink drive, strikes me as discriminatory for lorry and bus drivers having to conform to a lower limit than anyone else.
Harsher penalty, yes, if you get caught over the limit and you’ve got an HGV or PSV, and so it should be; but a 20ml limit means that many of us will effectively have to be tee-total 7 days a week. As it stands I don’t drink during the week, nor on Sunday night if I’m driving Monday morning, but if this comes in even a pint with me Sunday lunch could well be dodgy; and it begs the question that if I got caught in my car at, say, 45ml, under the normal limit, would the fact that I hold an HGV mean that I’d get banned anyway?
It’s a shame that truck/bus/proffessional drivers should face harsher penalties. Personally, as a non-drinker, I couldn’t give a stuff. In fact my feeling is that it should be zero for all, and that would eliminate grey areas that repeatedly catch people who genuinely feel that they are ‘safe-to-drive’. Trouble is, the insurance companies would hate that to happen, 'cos then they’d lose their high premium cash cows
In the industry I now work in, if you get tested for drugs and alcohol you are out the door with a reading of 30 mpmb and run a risk of arrest/prosecution for turning up at work under the influence. That is under half of a car license. It’s no problem, you just don’t drink vast quantities the day before work! Allow 1-1.5 hours per UNIT plus an hour to let it clear your system. I don’t bother having a drink until I get to a day or two off. As for whinging about it being lowered, I’ve no problem with that either, alot of European countries’ limit is already a darn sight lower than ours. If we want to be classed as “professional” we should show a bit of “professionalism” and don’t take the risk. If you get caught then I have absolutely no sympathy.
brookie:
In the industry I now work in, if you get tested for drugs and alcohol you are out the door with a reading of 30 mpmb and run a risk of arrest/prosecution for turning up at work under the influence. That is under half of a car license. It’s no problem, you just don’t drink vast quantities the day before work! Allow 1-1.5 hours per UNIT plus an hour to let it clear your system. I don’t bother having a drink until I get to a day or two off. As for whinging about it being lowered, I’ve no problem with that either, alot of European countries’ limit is already a darn sight lower than ours. If we want to be classed as “professional” we should show a bit of “professionalism” and don’t take the risk. If you get caught then I have absolutely no sympathy.
Regards,
Mark.
+1 I have no problem with these new limits and I welcome them . If you want to drink save it to the weekend or take the next day off - simples .
Predictable responses from the Mormons, Quakers and Temperance movement.
No-one’s yet answered my initial question though. I’m fully aware that being a vocational licence holder means that you already get treated more severely; I paid the Commissioner a visit back in 1992 and I certainly wasn’t offered tea and biscuits! I don’t have a problem with that; but I would like clarification as to whether being a vocational licence holder makes me subject to the lower threshold if I’m driving a car or riding my motorcycle.
If this is indeed the case, it should be strongly resisted; not because it effectively allows more leeway for me to have another half, I’ll simply do as stated in a post above and allow more time before driving, but because it discriminates unfairly against drivers who, by nature of their vocational licence, could be reasonably expected to be more capable drivers in the first place.
The irony of course is that it will probably make very little difference to the road death statistics; I’m willing to put a fair few quid down that the majority of drivers caught over the limit don’t even have a valid driving licence never mind a vocational one! As always the law-abiding majority are made to suffer a further restriction of their already limited pleasures to appease the road safety campaigners whose only wish is to see nothing at all on the roads apart from tumbleweed.
. And the answer to the inevitable “so you’d be happy for a drunk driver to kill your mother/daughter/son/father?” is “meh”.
Dunno how true it is, but I think they do have alcohol content in them so it could well be true. 
