.02 limit in Victoria in the news

[NAK302]

the people making these laws are chauffer driven after their Merlot lunch. do you really think they give a damn about a bunch of toothless tigers on a car forum? it's all about money. the revenue is not the issue, i'd suggest it's pressure from insurance institutions.

[kazawaki]

Originally Posted by minheim

Before they worry about about taking licences off sober people, how about they work out how to deal with the existing repeat offenders who will drive whilst disqualified and still drink beyond .05 or who have unregistered bombs that are continually driven.

yep throw them in the can,repeat means go to jail do not pass go ,loose your car and licence cancelled not suspended.

[LTDHO]

Why is it you only hear about motor accidents following the consumption of alcohol?

"the driver blew 3 times the limit!!"

A little naive but when do you hear of accidents following a .09 result or less?
Perhaps we can operate a motor vehicle safely up to .09 and maybe the BAC should be increased!

Sure this will mean lesser fine generated income.

[Romulus]

Make it 0.00 and be done with it. What kind of Turkey drink drives anyway.

[2011G6E]

Make it zero...take away all doubt, take away all the differences in how different people process alcohol. Some people can be 0.09 and be fine, some can be 0.03 and be falling over. It might actually make people think seriously about drink driving and how serious the consequences can be.
We have to do it for our job driving trains (I'm pretty sure heavy transport truck drivers do too)...it just takes a little discipline and thought about what you're doing and when you have to be on duty again.

Of course, my personal preference for drink driving laws wouldn't be popular...
* First offence (everyone is allowed one mistake): $5000 fine, loss of licence for two years...and none of this "work licence" bullcrap either...walk or ride a pushy. Might make you think about how stupid you were.
* Second offence: 10,000 fine, absolute loss of licence forever, never to hold any sort of licence ever again. Got the message yet?
* Third offence (for the truly stupid), $10,000 fine, a month in jail, and confiscation of whatever car you were driving at the time (unless stolen or rented I guess) with a $10,000 fee to get it back.


Us train drivers often wonder what the roads would look like if ordinary motorists had to come under the same rules we do...zero BAC, "resit your licence" completely every two or three years.
We don't know, but we bet they'd be a lot emptier...

[biased99]

As one or two other posters have pointed out, it is ALL about the revenue. The stats (both for above .05 and recidivism) are falling. That suggests that in the whole "supply and demand" scenario, you can either make the "per unit cost" dearer (much like utilities companies do, when price hikes force people to use less), OR, as in this case you can make it harder to avoid infringing, like...say...reducing speeding tolerances to 2kph over, or (something radical), lowering the BAC limit, in the face of falling infrigement rates...as a Government, what's not to like? Gotta love a confected crisis to get debates like this moving in the "right" direction, despite statistical evidence to the contrary...

*disclosure* I do not, and have never driven over the limit. In fact, I'll either have a few drinks, or I'll drive...Never both. Don't support drink driving. But my comments above are still valid.

[marty351]

Scenario... New law, now at .02.
A.C.A. news flash! The alarming rise in drivers being caught above the limit and new calls for a .00
B.A.C. to be introduced. Stay tuned for the shocking statistics you wont believe! ......

[Serial_Fool]

If we could save lives by driving around with an electric bum plug, would anyone here do it?

Providing there are government statistics that prove that it reduces the offense rate....

[marty351]

Originally Posted by Serial_Fool

If we could save lives by driving around with an electric bum plug, would anyone here do it?

Providing there are government statistics that prove that it reduces the offense rate....

O.H.S. safety issue - C.F.M.E.U. calls for a national strike.

[Iggle Piggle]

Drink driving is stupid and dangerous...but in my opinion .02 is not drink driving.

20% of fatal accidents in Vic involve alcohol? Would be interested to know if that stat would include drunk pedestrians killed by sober drivers where the pedestrian was at fault? Wonder if it would include the death of a passenger impaired by alcohol that died in a car driven by a sober driver.

Some of their stats can be more cloudy than a Cooper's

[Charliewool]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Make it zero...take away all doubt, take away all the differences in how different people process alcohol. Some people can be 0.09 and be fine, some can be 0.03 and be falling over. It might actually make people think seriously about drink driving and how serious the consequences can be.
We have to do it for our job driving trains (I'm pretty sure heavy transport truck drivers do too)...it just takes a little discipline and thought about what you're doing and when you have to be on duty again.

Of course, my personal preference for drink driving laws wouldn't be popular...
* First offence (everyone is allowed one mistake): $5000 fine, loss of licence for two years...and none of this "work licence" bullcrap either...walk or ride a pushy. Might make you think about how stupid you were.
* Second offence: 10,000 fine, absolute loss of licence forever, never to hold any sort of licence ever again. Got the message yet?
* Third offence (for the truly stupid), $10,000 fine, a month in jail, and confiscation of whatever car you were driving at the time (unless stolen or rented I guess) with a $10,000 fee to get it back.


Us train drivers often wonder what the roads would look like if ordinary motorists had to come under the same rules we do...zero BAC, "resit your licence" completely every two or three years.
We don't know, but we bet they'd be a lot emptier...

Instead of thinking of yourself and what your employment conditions impose on YOU.... How about considering others desires?
Out of your bubble for a moment and consider these 3 questions..

1/. Will lowering from .05 to .02 decrease the road toll?
2/. What effect will it have on firstly, the average law abiding Joe Blow that enjoys a wine with his meal, secondly the effect on any business (large or small) with a liquor licence?
3/. Do you honestly think controlling laws like this one are FAIR and reasonable?

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Charliewool

Instead of thinking of yourself and what your employment conditions impose on YOU.... How about considering others desires?
Out of your bubble for a moment and consider these 3 questions..

1/. Will lowering from .05 to .02 decrease the road toll?
2/. What effect will it have on firstly, the average law abiding Joe Blow that enjoys a wine with his meal, secondly the effect on any business (large or small) with a liquor licence?
3/. Do you honestly think controlling laws like this one are FAIR and reasonable?

1. Opportunity to raise more $$$ while keeping lobby group happy, politics.

2. Have same wine, stay longer and eat more, or someone else drives, or public transport/taxi or walk if its the local. Me and the old man used to walk to the local restaurant, then we could drink as much as we wanted.

3. Someone once told me life aint fair. You should have seen what the local cops here did to the pub before they had a beer garden, people would go outside with their drinks outside the door on the footpath to have a smoke, cops would be there booking everyone for alcohol in public place. Every night, no fail until the pub eventually renovated and the smokers went into the garden rather than outside its doors.

Or maybe the easier way to raise money would just be increase taxes on alcohol, chuck an extra 20% on it and smokes.