# Thoughts on DUI?



## Clutch (9/8/13)

Just wondering on my fellow brewers thoughts about Australian DUI laws/penalties?

I work for DTMR, and I'm astounded at the amount of people who still think of getting caught behind the wheel at .192 as just "bad luck".

The latest was a truckie who couldn't get a job becuase of his interlock condition, and (direct quote) said:

"This interlock thing ruins lives".

You can probably guess my response.

Are we too soft, being .05, rather than say, the US's .08 for most states?


----------



## Black Devil Dog (9/8/13)

No, I would rather his life be ruined because he can't learn, than him drive his truck into mine or anyone's family while driving under the influence.

I have a truck, but in my experience, truck drivers are the biggest cowboys on the road, many seem to have a "might is right" bully boy attitude.

The point of view of some people I know regarding DUI, is whether they will get caught or not. It doesn't seem to register that they might kill someone, destroy a families life, as well as their own and have to live with the consequences for the rest of their lives.

_Don't you mean too hard .05 compared to .08?_

Leave it at .05


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (9/8/13)

No excuses......get caught then tuff

Mind you..but..I have done the drove home drunk one eye open and woke up and thought...**** me..

I have driven home from local pub and woke up in the morning to see the front of my work car torn off...as a result of me leaving the pub shitfaced and reversing and collecting the rear of the other car.

Yes I live in a rural area and have had to put the car into autopilot.

How the **** i got home on many ocassions is beyond me.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (9/8/13)

You get caught then tough....

There are times when I think back and if I was caught or even worse KILLED somoeone then jail was the place for me


----------



## Donske (9/8/13)

I think we are far too lenient in Australia, none of this 3rd strike you get an interlock bull shit, 3rd strike you should be going to bloody jail for 12 months, period, it's the one thing I could handle mandatory sentencing on.


----------



## Clutch (9/8/13)

First strike over .150 is interlock, as is fail to give breath sample, or two DUI in 5 years, both after 6/8/10.


----------



## DU99 (9/8/13)

there is reason people get interlock's..they are repeat offender's..we are slack with our sentencing,how many times do we hear of people that are driving and they have been fined numerous time's and they think's its a joke..bit more of jail time or weekend's in the cooler


----------



## meathead (9/8/13)

Would you advocate 00 for all?


----------



## nu_brew (9/8/13)

I used to work with a guy who had been DUIed a few times and was look at a possible jail sentence. 

The boss hooked him up with a good lawyer and he got off lightly (again!). 

6months later he wrapped his car around a pole and now needs people to feed him and wipe his arse. 

Maybe jail might have helped, maybe not, but I don't want to share the road with people like that.


----------



## MartinOC (9/8/13)

meathead said:


> Would you advocate 00 for all?


In an ideal situation, yes. But in all practicality, how would/could it be Policed? Also, rather punitive for someone who has had a single, sociable beer after work & then goes home & gets pulled over.


----------



## Cocko (9/8/13)

Honest opinion.

Go 00 - It is the worst of actions.. Driving a car is dangerous enough with out adding alcohol to the equation.

I got done for .008 when I was 23, now 36 - and I still shudder at the things I could have done in that head state.

Punish, Punish and Punish harder IMHO.. ****, youth will be youth and being drunk and the false sense of security is the problem....

Parents need to teach the value of life.

I now have my own personal breatho I use in the case of morning after.... If you are gonna drink it is part of the equation.

There is enough transport options and knowledge in our modern day living to avoid the loss of life.

Or whatever - 4.6c


----------



## Liam_snorkel (9/8/13)

I think the laws are about right.


----------



## Cocko (9/8/13)

Liam_snorkel said:


> I think the laws are about right.



I agree, but the punishment is not.

Especially for repeat offenders... IMO.


I drive better drunk.


----------



## Liam_snorkel (9/8/13)

For myself and the other people I know the punishments were about right. There are however always going to be people who don't think of the consequences of their actions _at all_, imposed or otherwise.


----------



## Donske (9/8/13)

Cocko said:


> Honest opinion.
> 
> Go 00 - It is the worst of actions.. Driving a car is dangerous enough with out adding alcohol to the equation.
> 
> ...


Weirdly with my view on drink driver I disagree with a .00 limit, I think .05 is pretty much dead on.

Owning a good quality Andatech personal breatho myself I know just how little it takes to hit that mark and how bloody long it takes to drop below it, I also know how quickly the effects I personally feel ramp up from .05 to .08 and above. Realistically no one mistakenly drives above .05, you bloody well know when it's sketchy, and if in any doubt don't ******* drive, it's pretty simple.


----------



## Cocko (9/8/13)

Liam_snorkel said:


> For myself and the other people I know the punishments were about right. There are however always going to be people who don't think of the consequences of their actions _at all_, imposed or otherwise.


And with me, as I said, I have been done and have learned from it, thank fully the rules allowed it.

But, I know for a fact that there are repeat offenders who get let off over and over again.. what about them? How do you curb their behaviour?

I dont know, I just think it should be a higher priority in the 'learning' period of driving.

Fark this, I am gonna pour a black wit and loose my self in some floor swimming!


EDIT: REPEAT OFFENDERS!! - Tis my point.


----------



## Dave70 (9/8/13)

I got pinched On a Saturday 2.30 am when I was 23.
At an intersection in the middle of nowhere.
On a KDX 250.
No helmet.
Mate on the back (his arm was in a sling) - also helmetless.
Goon bag wedged between us.
Blew 0.192.
Fortunately, they didin't take swabs it those days.

That is a _true story_.

Unbelievably recless and selfish when I look back, but where we lived in the semi rural Hawkesbury, thats just what we did, nobody seemed to give a ****.
It was literally one corner then a 5k straight run to the pub from my folks house. It was never like ' oh goody, we're pissed, lets go fo a drive'. You run low on beer, got sick of some shitty party, off you went.
It wasn't like your mates just lived around the corner.

I aggree 0.05 is a happy medium. Its like anything. Raise the speed limit to 120, everyone wants to drive 140. Raise the limit to .08, most will take the punt with four or five schooners in their guts.
If I'm honest, I'd rather have a mineral water at the pub with a meal than one and a half beers. What's the ******* point? And with a wife and kids in the car with me 90% of the time, thats generally what happens.


----------



## Liam_snorkel (9/8/13)

My mrs got done at 0.052 (picking me up from a night out) and she is the most risk-averse person I know. There is no way she would get behind the wheel if she thought she was even close to being over. Got a fine and a suspension, and now will not drive even after one wine hours before. 
Having Said all that, I think 0.05 is about right because its enough to catch you out after having a couple and well before you're actual intoxicated. Above 0.08 the suspension is immediate and penalties much harsher because you're legally defined as intoxicated, and to paraphrase Donske when you're 0.08 you know you're under the effect and should definitely not get behind the wheel.


----------



## Cocko (9/8/13)

You live, you learn I guess...


----------



## Camo6 (9/8/13)

I had a few close calls as a younger bloke driving when I damn well shouldn't have been. Never got caught or hurt myself or anyone so I guess I never really woke up to myself. Now after a couple of kids there's no way I'd chance a DUI. Not only do I appreciate how vital my licence is to paying my mortgage and feeding the family but I now know how important it is to keep dickheads off the roads for the safety of others. Anyhoo, will post more when I'm not using the phone as this traffics shit, it's starting to rain and the oxycontin's coming on strong.


----------



## manticle (9/8/13)

Run over me, my lady or one of my cats and you deserve everything you get.
Extrapolate from that to drive pissed and hurt someone or something you shouldn't and could have avoided. 

No need for 0.00 - hate to see people criminalised for eating a liqueur chocolate


----------



## Cocko (9/8/13)

Thoughts on repeat offences Mants?


----------



## Clutch (9/8/13)

Liam_snorkel said:


> My mrs got done at 0.052 (picking me up from a night out) and she is the most risk-averse person I know. There is no way she would get behind the wheel if she thought she was even close to being over. Got a fine and a suspension, and now will not drive even after one wine hours before.
> Having Said all that, I think 0.05 is about right because its enough to catch you out after having a couple and well before you're actual intoxicated. Above 0.08 the suspension is immediate and penalties much harsher because you're legally defined as intoxicated, and to paraphrase Donske when you're 0.08 you know you're under the effect and should definitely not get behind the wheel.


.052? Shiiiiit, _that_ is what I call unlucky.
Would've been a disqualification, not a suspension, and it's over .100 that you get an immediate roadside suspension, and that ends when you get disqualified.

Suspensions are from DTMR, for demerit points, or a high-speed (40kmh+) infringement.
Disqualifications are from the courts, for DUI, unlicensed driving, dangerous driving, and a few other things.
If you get suspended, then you simply start driving again after it ends.
If it's a disqualification, you need to renew your licence before you start driving again, even if you've got 4 years or so before it expires.

Try explaining that to someone who's been pinged for driving on an expired licence, been given a notice to appear, and straight away dropped $148.80 on a 5 year licence before going to court and getting a 1 month disqualification... Fun times.


----------



## Liam_snorkel (9/8/13)

Repeat high range or repeat low range?


----------



## Liam_snorkel (9/8/13)

@ Clutch haha yeah sorry I'm not up with the lingo but you got the idea. 

I made the mistake myself when I got booked in my early 20s. They didn't physically take my license off me so I thought that after my three months were up I could just go back to driving around with it. Fast forward a couple of years I went to get it renewed and the lass behind the desk informed me that I'd been driving unlicensed for over two years. Whoops. 6 months longer and I would have had to sit another test.


----------



## manticle (9/8/13)

Cocko said:


> Thoughts on repeat offences Mants?


You get caught once - lose licence, 0.0 restricted licence when you receive it back for x months
Caught twice - some kind of training program and extended 0.0 or 0.0 forever. 3 times =no licence ever.

Kill or maim person or animal while dui - same punishment plus community service or jail term depending on seriousness of offence.

Off the cuff suggestions but roughly my line of thinking


----------



## Clutch (9/8/13)

If you blow .100 at any time, it's an immediate roadside suspension.
If you blow .150 or higher, it's that, plus the ultimate bolt-on modification for your car, on return from the disqualification.
As I said earlier, two over the no alcohol, general, or mid-range limits within 5 years will get you the interlock as well.
$3,000 is a lot of cash to burn on something that doesn't make your car go faster or sound better.


----------



## Clutch (9/8/13)

Liam_snorkel said:


> @ Clutch haha yeah sorry I'm not up with the lingo but you got the idea.
> 
> I made the mistake myself when I got booked in my early 20s. They didn't physically take my license off me so I thought that after my three months were up I could just go back to driving around with it. Fast forward a couple of years I went to get it renewed and the lass behind the desk informed me that I'd been driving unlicensed for over two years. Whoops. 6 months longer and I would have had to sit another test.


Happens more than you'd think. The courts don't tell people shit, and then 6 weeks before they finish the disqual, they get the interlock letter....


----------



## Camo6 (9/8/13)

manticle said:


> You get caught once - lose licence, 0.0 restricted licence when you receive it back for x months
> Caught twice - some kind of training program and extended 0.0 or 0.0 forever. 3 times =no licence ever.
> 
> Kill or maim person or animal while dui - same punishment plus community service or jail term depending on seriousness of offence.
> ...


I agree along these lines also but think the punishment should be meted out with heavy fines. I would rather see repeat offenders slapped with a permanent interlock device instead of being banned from driving permanently. I imagine a lot of banned drivers would continue to run the gauntlet and keep driving with a 'to hell with it' attitude. I've worked on a couple of cars with interlocks and those things are a pain in the ass and not easily overcome.


----------



## simplefisherman (9/8/13)

Norfolk Island rules could be adopted on the mainland; no RBT, but if you have an accident you get tested / charged.Speed limit on the entire island is 50kph ( 25 past the school... ) and the cows have right of way. And its practically mandatory to wave when you pass another vehicle.
To be fair though it only takes 5 min to go from one side of the island to the other, so maybe not so practical.

Must admit I have been lucky on the few occasions ( content removed ), but definitely not worth the risk to others, livelihood etc.. a couple of my mates have lost parents through drunk drivers, I think that's what brought it home for me, bad enough to lose family through natural causes let alone some drunken **** thinking ' she'll be right '.
Now I let the wife take care of the evening driving and I do the driving with the camptrailer attached.

Repeat offenders? I guess harsher penalties, and maybe some kind of extreme aversion therapy.


----------



## manticle (9/8/13)

Happy to chuck interlock or vehicle confiscation in as well as fines consistent with seriousness of offence. 100 dollars for every point over?

Also offenders caught driving with suspended licence accelerated to next level. Dui while suspended = permanent loss.
Hey I could be a legislator.


----------



## Proffs (9/8/13)

DUI is just the tip of the iceberg. Magistrates need to start getting tough with all criminals; not just drink drivers. It's becoming more and more of a joke everyday. Why bother working and being honest when you can rob and assault all you like and continue to get suspended sentences.


----------



## Northside Novice (9/8/13)

its all a bit of a joke, those people that starved their kids to death get the choice/chance to plea bargain down to manslaughter for a better life .

makes me sick.


uk are well stricker on dui , and the locals treat it as a very serious, shameful offence , unlike us, its a bit of a boys club macho rite of passage ' how much did you blow ? .126, is that all? ya pussy "


----------



## pk.sax (9/8/13)

I'm a little slower and gradual when drunk. It might just be safer than sober me...

Seriously though, people should not be getting behind the wheel impaired, sleep, alcohol, tired, it should be treated just the same. I know from my experience that it does the exact same thing to my driving ability. The best thing I've done when drunk is to sit on it till I'm good and sober. If I'm 0.04 and not sober, it's not good enough. Neither do I give a shit if I happen to be 0.06 but in a good condition (haven't tested that theory, I climb down fast from a high - tested). If you can sit up straight and concentrate on someone saying something to you for 15 minutes or so and be able to pass a quiz on it, you're sober I'd think.


----------



## goomboogo (10/8/13)

practicalfool said:


> If you can sit up straight and concentrate on someone saying something to you for 15 minutes or so and be able to pass a quiz on it, you're sober I'd think.


Even without having a drink, I would never be able to drive.


----------



## Clutch (10/8/13)

goomboogo said:


> Even without having a drink, I would never be able to drive.


Yeah, way to pick on the ADD kids.


----------



## pk.sax (10/8/13)

My worst moments on the road have been due to a deficit of attention, and I squarely blame myself. Oh, and the GPS on occasion.


----------



## komodo (13/8/13)

Having been pulled into the booze bus for a secondary reading after the primary was over 0.05 and blowing under I have to say anyone that gets caught over 0.05 KNOWS they're over. I was dead set positive when I saw the van that I'd run out of luck and wasn't surprised when the initial test came back over how ever was absolutely surprised when the secondary reading came back under.

Whilst since then I've been a lot more cautious about how much I've had to drink before getting behind the steerer, I'll be honest there were times in my younger days where I don't really know how I got home without an accident - and I'm not talking 5 minutes down the road either.

I think more education on the affects of alcohol on drives needs to be available. I would even like to see the better personal bretholizers come with an accreditation and be some what subsidised.

I still think 0.05 is a good level. Its high enough that the average person can have a drink or two with a meal and still be fine yet low enough that the risk, statistically, is still quite low.


----------



## bum (19/8/13)

MartinOC said:


> In an ideal situation, yes. But in all practicality, how would/could it be policed?


In exactly the same way 0.5 is.

Or any other law, for that matter - you get caught, you're in the shit.


----------



## Parks (19/8/13)

Clutch said:


> .052? Shiiiiit, _that_ is what I call unlucky.


Except she would have most likely blown 0.06 - 0.07 at the car.

I got done about 10 years ago and I blew 0.102 or something at the car yet offically charged at 0.09. I was another of these "I know better" young ins so thank fk I never had an accident...


----------



## Liam_snorkel (19/8/13)

^ no not necessarily. I was done twice in my irresponsible youth and blew pretty much the same btw the handheld & official machine.


----------



## Parks (19/8/13)

Liam_snorkel said:


> ^ no not necessarily. I was done twice in my irresponsible youth and blew pretty much the same btw the handheld & official machine.


That would suggest, to me, that you drove quite quickly after drinking (still were processing liquid in your stomach).

If you are purely processing blood alcohol it should drop pretty quick.


----------



## staggalee (19/8/13)

It`s odd when you think about it......... if you drive home pissed and get caught, you`re a loser 

if you drive home pissed and make it....... you`re a ******* legend. :lol:


----------



## Liam_snorkel (19/8/13)

Parks said:


> That would suggest, to me, that you drove quite quickly after drinking (still were processing liquid in your stomach).
> 
> If you are purely processing blood alcohol it should drop pretty quick.



something like that.

In my partners case the two readings were taken 5 mins or so apart and from what I remember were a couple of points apart (not 0.06-0.07 as you suggested on the last page).


----------



## Parks (19/8/13)

Liam_snorkel said:


> something like that.
> 
> In my partners case the two readings were taken 5 mins or so apart and from what I remember were a couple of points apart (not 0.06-0.07 as you suggested on the last page).


Wow - 5 mins? It was about an hour when I got done.


----------



## Liam_snorkel (19/8/13)

the booze bus was on site, I wasn't waiting long.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (19/8/13)

Bloke in Coffs Harbour got done for .335 recently. A member of public actually performed a citizens arrest. Driver mountedthe gutter and went into a carpark and smashed into the back of a 4wd. God knows what would have happened if he kept goinh


----------



## komodo (19/8/13)

HOLY CRAP! That's properly poleaxed


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (19/8/13)

That guy who blew .335 is on A Current Affair tonight. ACA are interviewing him out the front of his flat and he is pissed. He kept knocking over his glass of wine. Classic

He is as pissed as 10drunk men..


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (19/8/13)

Link 

http://aca.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8708760


----------



## staggalee (20/8/13)

how `bout when he got up and tried to go thru the front door? :lol:


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (20/8/13)

Doors are never wide enough when your pissed


----------



## Yob (20/8/13)

Penalties should include a mandatory 1000 hours community service working with crash victims with a +150 hours for every point over .08, if then they re-offend, cars confiscated and sold with the money going to help crash victims, sending folks to prison aint the answer Im afraid.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (20/8/13)

Unfortunatly that doesnt allways work. I know blokes that the only way to stop them from continually reoffending is to lock them up. Some people just dont get it


----------



## wbosher (20/8/13)

.05 is a good limit. Over here it's .08 and from experience that is too high. In my youth I drove home from the pub one night so shitfaced that I had to close one eye. I got pulled over at a checkpoint and blew over the limit (don't know exactly what it was) on the roadside...back to cop shop I went.

About 30 minutes later, I blew into the official machine and blew the limit, on the dot. One more point and I would have been done. I was under the limit, and completely rat arsed! There were several other occasions when I had a few and knew I shouldn't really have been driving, and blew under on the roadside. Fortunately, I had kids and pulled my head in, probably saved my life...and probably someone else too.

There's been talk about lowering the limit to .05, I hope they do one day. Under 20's the limit is 0.00


----------



## Rowy (20/8/13)

Parks said:


> That would suggest, to me, that you drove quite quickly after drinking (still were processing liquid in your stomach).
> 
> If you are purely processing blood alcohol it should drop pretty quick.


Depends on lots of variables including when and what you last ate and the big one is the condition of your liver.


----------



## pk.sax (20/8/13)

I was in your country wbosher, jet lagged from 2 days of flying and then drove up from Christchurch to Nelson, halfway through I was buggered as hell. Couldn't keep an eye open even. Spotted the pub and stopped for a drink on the way. Made me feel surprisingly good and woke me right up, when I asked the bar woman how the drinking limit goes before I had my second pint, I got asked if I'm from oz, then, 'whatever it is over there, twice as much n ur right'. No bloody worries. I suspect it goes heavily on individual capacity to put it away etc. I don't see them making it illegal to eat above a certain limit because it make people obese and sick eventually. Why should the law be made to suit the stupid that can't be trusted to know their limit. I'd rather bar staff were stricter and not serve intoxicated people. I you get caught driving intoxicated, the limit and how much you blow over shouldn't matter, their license should be taken away right away until a judge lets you have it back. Whatever happened to common sense! Bloody nanny state and people that ask for one. Just creates irresponsible idiots that just do as they please until caught.


----------



## yum beer (20/8/13)

DUI = gaol
.06 = gaol
.09 = gaol
.12 = gaol
No ******* excuses, no ******* tolerance.


----------



## Liam_snorkel (20/8/13)

that's ******* stupid.


----------



## jyo (20/8/13)

Great topic.

Had a close call and blew slightly under the limit when I was about 22. Received a stern chat from the copper at the time. It scared the shit out of me and really made me consider my own personal limits.

I think the punishments definitely need to be increased to fit the crime. I can only try to imagine the loss I would feel if one of my family was killed or maimed by a drunk driver.

The education system also needs more resources to enable it to be more proactive and teach our kids about their (potential) actions behind the wheel during high school. This needs to involve in-your-face strategies such as hearing from victims of drink driving and speakers who have attended crashes caused by drunk drivers. I've attended a few car accidents and what you see sticks with you for a long time. With life and death issues like this, kids need to be shocked a little I think.

Same goes for texting while driving. It's getting pretty hairy on the roads now.


----------



## yum beer (21/8/13)

Liam_snorkel said:


> that's ******* stupid.


Whats stupid.


----------



## Liam_snorkel (21/8/13)

Zero tolerance.


----------



## bum (21/8/13)

Is it _always_ stupid?


----------



## manticle (21/8/13)

Absolutely. Zero tolerance for zero tolerance.
Intolerant pricks.


----------



## Rowy (21/8/13)

Don't agree with zero tolerance either. Don't agree with lowering the limit under .05 for non P Plate drivers either. Not much on people turning up dead for other peoples fuckups though.


----------



## spog (21/8/13)

a work mate with a history for DUI was on his last 3 points, although not DUI last night he managed to fail to giveway and collected an unmarked police vehicle. 12 months loss of licence on the spot,car rooted,and possibly his job too. some people.! ..cheers..spog...


----------



## spog (22/8/13)

adding to my post above i found out today that the work mate is in serious trouble.
he was pissed and unlicenced. charges are. 

1. DUI
2.aggravated driving without due care.
3.dangerous driving.
4. driving while disqualified.
5.failing to comply with breath test.

his car impounded for 28 days.
an extra 12 months licence disqualification on top of existing. gets it back in 2016.
and has to front up in court.

dumb [email protected]#t. cheers..spog...


----------



## angus_grant (22/8/13)

at least the 28 days impounding may hurt him.

He won't care about the extra 12 months as he hasn't cared about the current suspension.

Results of the court case will be interesting, which may make him care about the license suspension.

Stupid bastard, hope he gets the book thrown at him. Danger to everyone else on the road.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (22/8/13)

Not only that but he will be up for the cost of the police car. Go DUI and the insurance company will just laugh at you


----------



## spog (22/8/13)

angus_grant said:


> at least the 28 days impounding may hurt him.
> 
> He won't care about the extra 12 months as he hasn't cared about the current suspension.
> 
> ...


curiously? Danger happens to be his nickname. he may end up in the clink,could prove a "danger" to him. ..cheers...spog...


----------



## punkin (22/8/13)

Would not suprise me if that did happen.


----------



## Cocko (30/8/13)

Just got news my Brother inlaws, brother got done for DUI. [In the USA]

Ok, story:

He lives in the USA - Florida - He had 2 priors - JUST over, both times, and had paid the penalties for those... 

He is a 32 yo nice, well brought up, well educated very nice guy.... Career as a UNI lecturer.

So, for this charge - he is driving over, again, and again only a little over - A 86 yo lady runs a red light, by no means his fault but an accident occurs due to her error - and the authorities admit this.

She was not wearing a seatbelt..... she died.

He is now going to court facing 'vehicle homicide' charges due to the fact he had a BA reading - Minimum is 9 years. MINIMUM!

If he hadn't been drinking, it would be an accidental manslaughter charge - possible to avoid time behind bars, in particular she was not wearing a seatbelt.

With priors, he will be facing time and it will be at least 9 years in a USA correctional system. 

Family is in shock!


----------



## Camo6 (30/8/13)

That sucks mate. Goes to show how careful you need to be nowadays, regardless of fault.

I spoke to a mate of a mate, one session, who lived in the US. He drove DUI (could hardly walk) and took out a bunch of parked cars, luckily no one was hurt. Looked like facing some hefty charges but he worked for an IT company who backed him 100%. His lawyer bypassed the usual channels and chose a judge he had a good rapport with and the charge was squashed.

Obviously your BIL's charge is a lot more serious but when faced with that sort of sentence I'd be looking at getting the best lawyer you can't afford. Once again, that sucks.


----------



## Forever Wort (17/9/13)

Two aspects strike me.

First is whether you should obey .05 simply because _it is the law_. If you reap the benefits of a lawful society, which everyone in this thread appears to do, then respect for the law should follow. I have no respect for people who take the rule of law for granted. For example: an outlaw motorcycle gang. Great, they're the one-percenters. They want to live outside society, avoid tax and zoom around the roads causing mischief. But who builds the roads? People who pay taxes. One-percenters by definition cannot live outside society; they rely on it. They are living in contradiction and they are living selfishly. Doesn't mean they aren't cool cats to hang out with. But it does mean they're deeply pathetic.

This example can extend to DUI. If you want to feel secure when you cross the road at night, you shouldn't drink drive. If you want to feel that your girlfriend or wife is safe when she goes out on a Saturday night with the girls, you shouldn't drink drive. 

Second is whether .05 is the right level for the law to kick in and the kinds of driver education states engage in. I personally think that the level of alcohol in the blood - from 0.01 to 0.10 - is less important than the attitude of the driver. If an experienced, self-aware driver with a BAC of 0.10 gets in their car _knowing _they will be unsafe on the road and stays under fifty kilometres an hour, double-checking every stop, start and turn then they will probably get home and probably not injure anyone. However, if a 22yr old on 0.07 drives his mates down to Maccas from the pub and excitedly shows off, drives recklessly cos HE'S SO FKN PISSED HAHA then there is a higher likelihood of an accident occurring. 

You can't measure unsafe attitudes with a breath test. For this reason education campaigns on safe driving attitudes, in particular in relation to alcohol and drug use, would be a really good idea. It should start with people on their L-plates. All learner drivers usually get at least some lessons with an accredited instructor; it would be easy to co-opt that industry into delivering this kind of education.


----------



## HBHB (17/9/13)

Those who know me will understand where i'm coming from on this.

There's no such thing as an "accident" when it comes to Drink Driving. It's premeditated. If you're pissed and get behind the wheel of a vehicle, then your actions are not accidental, they're planned and actioned from that very first moment that you think to yourself, "I could be over the limit".

I had 20 odd years on road as a Paramedic, have absolutely no idea how many dead bodies I've assessed in that time from RTC's and can't even begin to imagine what the numbers are of people injured or outright maimed for life because some wanker was too egoistical or just plain narcissistic to put the rest of the populations need to travel safely before their own short-sightedness. **** them.

The laws are there to protect not only the idiots, but the remainder of the population. Fact of the matter is, most humans are already affected by alcohol at 0.05% BAC, whether they'd believe it or not. Reaction times are slowed, critical thinking is slowed and about another dozen bodily functions are affected by the time you hit 0.05%

I think the laws basis is sound, it's just such a crying shame that our Judicial system takes such a flaccid approach to a serious antisocial behaviour perpetrated against ordinary people just driving around trying to go about life.

Someone help me off the soapbox, i'm getting old and grumpy.

Martin


----------



## Forever Wort (17/9/13)

HBHB said:


> There's no such thing as an "accident" when it comes to Drink Driving. It's premeditated. If you're pissed and get behind the wheel of a vehicle, then your actions are not accidental, they're planned and actioned from that very first moment that you think to yourself, "I could be over the limit".
> 
> I had 20 odd years on road as a Paramedic, have absolutely no idea how many dead bodies I've assessed in that time from RTC's and can't even begin to imagine what the numbers are of people injured or outright maimed for life because some wanker was too egoistical or just plain narcissistic to put the rest of the populations need to travel safely before their own short-sightedness. **** them.


I was worried I wasn't being compassionate enough, but compared to this my attitude looks positively generous!

It really is straightforward. I think if people just sat and _thought_ about how lucky they are to live in a lawful society every now and then they would not be tempted to break the law.

If you think a law or rule is stupid, you should lobby to get it changed, rather than break it.

There are tricky areas in the law which have a bit of grey (a contemporary one would be copyright and IP) but driving drunk is not one of them.


----------



## rheffera (17/9/13)

Well im 24 and never been behind the wheel drunk. I won't drink at all until i am done driving for the day. I bus into the city or walk to my local for drinks. 

I have had a few near misses on the road and that was SOBER. probably have been a different story if i had piss in me.

I don't have many friends as i only associate with like minded stable people who don't do stupid things, which in my age bracket is rare

Had this argument with someone at my local who was cool with the concept of drink driving.

"Would you work with an acetylene torch Pissed?" "No" "Then why the **** do you think it's ok to drink and drive"

The punishment for drink driving and killing someone is a joke.

YOu go away for how long? 3 years or less? For being a ******* moron and taking a LIFE? Seems to be the easiest way to murder someone and get away heaps lightly.

Step 1. Find your desired victim
Step 2. Chug some booze in yer car
Step 3. Run em down and Claim tragic accident because you were pissed
Step 4. Basically get away with murder.

System is a joke.


----------



## Liam_snorkel (18/9/13)

Yes, prison is the answer. Zero tolerance for stupid people, put them all in prison and set them to work making furniture and textiles. Also tired drivers, lock them up with the elderly who can't do shoulder checks and have appalling reaction times and no understanding of roundabouts and merging lanes. And don't forget the young drivers, hooligans the lot of em, and too inexperienced to allow on the roads. Last but not least fresh-off-the-boat cab drivers, who have no concept of line markings or no-standing areas.


----------



## pk.sax (18/9/13)

Ironic how social cost, responsibility and nanny state contradict each other.

There is a bit of Darwinism in that statement but you'd have to be really stupid to get on a 60-100kph roadway and expect everything perfect. All this talk of having driving schools and whatever teach young people responsibility, how about families own up to their brats and teach them common sense and life skills while they are younger. It's the rotten culture that drags it down. How many of these hooligans give a rats arse about what their loved ones think about them driving drunk. It's harder to give a **** about people you don't know.


----------



## rheffera (18/9/13)

Exactly the problem. If people cared about strangers as much as we do our own...There'd be alot less problems on this planet. But nope, small-minded selfish creatures. Nature of the beast.


----------



## Weizguy (18/9/13)

Clutch said:


> Just wondering on my fellow brewers thoughts about Australian DUI laws/penalties?
> 
> I work for DTMR, and I'm astounded at the amount of people who still think of getting caught behind the wheel at .192 as just "bad luck".
> 
> ...


Slap that b!tch...

Is he a Gen Y truckie, with no sense of responsibility and a massive sense of entitlement? (not that all gen Y are like that...just saying that some are).


----------



## wbosher (26/9/13)

Well after years and years (and more years) of talking, looks like it might finally be happening. Of course it'll take another year or two for anything to actually happen...not that the recidivist drink driver will give a rats arse...

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9213060/Bill-slashing-drink-drive-limit-selected


----------



## Bribie G (29/9/13)

Here's one for the Darwin Awards, currently by the side of the road on Oxley Island NSW. No idea if the occupant or occupants survived. Won't take you too long to work out what happened:


----------



## Forever Wort (29/9/13)

Looks like a tragedy. Hopefully no-one else outside of the written-off car was hurt or implicated.


----------



## Liam_snorkel (29/9/13)

Or the occupants.


----------



## TasChris (29/9/13)

I called the cops today on a driver that that was clearly pissed. He pulled up at the service station I was at and took 3 goes to get in the front door.

Since having kids I have zero tolerance for risk taking.

Did feel strange to squeal...a little "un-Australian"

**** him. We really need to change the culture if we want to make the roads as safe as possible

Cheers
Dobber Chris


----------



## Bribie G (29/9/13)

Liam_snorkel said:


> Or the occupants.


They'll be right. Gen Y P platers are immortal, ask them. 
I'll check the Manning River Times tomorrow.


----------



## Fat Bastard (29/9/13)

Bribie G said:


> They'll be right. Gen Y P platers are immortal, ask them.
> I'll check the Manning River Times tomorrow.


Wrong Bribie, all young blokes think they're immortal. 20 years ago I was doing late night timed runs through twisty National Park roads in a hot rod Alfa Romeo, and 50 years ago my uncle was driving home from St George motor boat club too pissed to walk and having to crawl from the car to the front door.

By comparison, the vast majority of Gen Y P Platers I see are paragons of responsibility.


----------



## Camo6 (29/9/13)

I don't know FB. I bet that little Alfa would struggle to keep up with a bog standard falcon or commodore of today's standards. Maybe today's young blokes attitudes aren't that much different but the power output of todays engines certainly are.


----------



## Fat Bastard (29/9/13)

Camo6 said:


> I don't know FB. I bet that little Alfa would struggle to keep up with a bog standard falcon or commodore of today's standards. Maybe today's young blokes attitudes aren't that much different but the power output of todays engines certainly are.


 Heh,

My Alfa would do a measured 220, and up a twisty road, I'd back it over my last VE SS Commodore , or my current XR6 Turbo, which is incidentally artificially limited to 200 from the factory. Neither car is available (legally) to modern P Platers either.

That being said, modern cars handle better, stop better and are easier to drive faster more safely than cars have ever been. I used to have an R1 which put out 145hp at the back wheel, and it felt very tame compared to my 80hp Ducati classic race bike. The newer ones with more power probably feel even tamer.

It's not the vehicles, its not the speed limits, its not the booze, it's just young blokes doing what young blokes have always done in an increasingly media driven (and thus legislated) world.


----------

