• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

"Travellers"

Why? It's legal if you are under a certain limit. I was at a work function last night where I had two beers in two hours and drove home, certainly under the limit. Was I irresponsible? Where is the evidence of irresponsibility please.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0847/is_n1_v14/ai_9353143/

SUMMARY

The behaviors involved in driving a motor vehicle are impaired by alcohol in varying degrees. However, investigators have not found an absolute threshold below which there is no impairment of any kind. Certain skills important for driving are impaired at 0.01 to 0.02 percent BAC or, in other words, at the lowest levels that can be measured reliably.
The area most critical to driving--that is, the brain's ability to observe, interpret, and process information from the eyes and other senses--is also impaired by alcohol. A driver cannot operate a vehicle safely if:

* information processing is slowed

* visual perception is degraded

* ability to allocate attention to multiple sources of information is limited.

With these kinds of central deficits, sooner or later a driver will fail to see something that is in the path of the vehicle--a car, a pedestrian, a fixed object--and an accident occurs.

It is important to understand that crashes are not limited to drivers with high BACs. Rather, there is a significant risk that extends to low and moderate BACs. Drivers need to know that they are impaired and are at increased risk of crash when they have consumed even small amounts of alcohol. The safety-minded consumer will restrict alcohol use to times and places that do not include driving.
 
Why? It's legal if you are under a certain limit. I was at a work function last night where I had two beers in two hours and drove home, certainly under the limit. Was I irresponsible? Where is the evidence of irresponsibility please.

Depending on your size and the strength of the beer*, 2 may well have put you over the limit...assuming 2 equates to 2 pints.

*1 can of Strongbow (admittedly cider not beer) is enough to take someone over the limit.
 
Depending on your size and the strength of the beer*, 2 may well have put you over the limit...assuming 2 equates to 2 pints.

*1 can of Strongbow (admittedly cider not beer) is enough to take someone over the limit.

Bloody Poms ;). Two beers here is not two pints. It's two 300 ml small bottles. Well under 0.05.
 
So what's the consensus. You can't drive with any alcohol content in your blood, which will require a change to the legal system in most nations. Or you can and the alcohol content can only come from the G&T you drink before driving, and not from the small bottle of beer (stubby in Australia) while you are driving?
 
Why would we want to be encouraging drink driving on any level? Legal or not, the message it sends to condone drinking behind the wheel makes no sense.
 
how dare the government make it illegal for me to consume an intoxicating substance while operating heavy machinery!
 
how dare the government make it illegal for me to consume an intoxicating substance while operating heavy machinery!

Except it will legal if you have consumed it a second before starting the machinery, but not a second after when this new law is passed. This is logical how?
 
A point of clarification. The last time I had a traveller was over 20 years ago, so I don't have a direct investment in this issue.
 
So what's the consensus. You can't drive with any alcohol content in your blood, which will require a change to the legal system in most nations. Or you can and the alcohol content can only come from the G&T you drink before driving, and not from the small bottle of beer (stubby in Australia) while you are driving?
Making it illegal to drive and drink makes logistical and economic sense for law enforcement agencies and legal systems..
For DUI lawyers ? Not so much ..
 
Making it illegal to drive and drink makes logistical and economic sense for law enforcement agencies and legal systems..
For DUI lawyers ? Not so much ..

I'm not clear. Are you arguing for zero alcohol blood content while driving? This is a consistent argument at least.
 
Except it will legal if you have consumed it a second before starting the machinery, but not a second after when this new law is passed. This is logical how?

It's a logical small step along the way to making drink driving unacceptable in a culture which presently tolerates it.
 
Except it will legal if you have consumed it a second before starting the machinery, but not a second after when this new law is passed. This is logical how?

can we start by accepting the idea that operating a car becomes an increasingly poor idea the more alcohol you have in your system?

If so, how can it be considered a good idea to put more alcohol into your system while in the course of operating a motor vehicle?
 
Last edited:
I'm not clear. Are you arguing for zero alcohol blood content while driving? This is a consistent argument at least.

No, I'm arguing that it is much easier and cheaper, for enforcement agencies to write you up for drinking an alcoholic beverage, than proving you are over the limit...
 
Last edited:
I'm still flabbergasted that anyone anywhere could have thought this was a good idea at any point.
 
It won't stop the bogany types. Texas made travelers illegal about 10 years ago, and every gas station still sells single beers on ice. Just more nanny government.
 
It won't stop the bogany types. Texas made travelers illegal about 10 years ago, and every gas station still sells single beers on ice. Just more nanny government.

if stopping people drinking beer while driving is the nanny government, then thank god for the nanny government.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom