Christmas Drink Drive Campaign

MWHCVT

MWHCVT

In Memoriam
Suspended / Banned
Messages
28,464
Name
Matthew
Edit My Images
Yes
Having been pulled for a random check the other night it made me think about the campaign, over all I think that it's a really great thing :thumbs: but that it should be rolled out for the entire year :thumbs:

I think that DD is possibly one of the worst crimes going having especially having nearly got taken out by someone who was so drunk that according to the traffic officer that arrived at the scene that he didn't even realise that the police had taken his car keys :shake:

So who in TP land has blown on that little pipe :thumbs: and what are your own thoughts on the campaign :thinking:

I blew a big fat zero incase anyone was wondering :thumbs:

Matt
MWHCVT
 
I got stopped in Burnley last year, I was asked what I did for a living and replied Field engineer. He said " is it worth me asking to blow into here your not stupid are you " to which I replied " nope but I'll blow into it for you anyway " of course I blew a big fat zero.

I had a brother who was an alchoholic that drove drunk. I also have a very close friend who 15 years on is still suffering the effects of one drunken driver.

Personally I think it should be a regular thing along with dope testing.
 
hmmm.... I can never quite decide whether I agree or not and I say that as the ex-wife of a twice convicted drink-driver [no prizes for guessing one of the reasons for 'ex']

However, on Saturday, driving back from Mancunia, I was stopped and tested by a random check at Knutsford services on the M6. The conversation went something like this....

PC - Driver can you come to the front of the car please?
ME - Yes [exits car]
PC - You may have guessed, we are doing seasonal random checks for drink driving
ME - Yes, I guessed that much
PC - go on, how?
ME - well, your flashing christmas lights across the normal entrance was a bit of a giveaway
PC - [laughing], I know, we love them, we feel so festive! Have you ever been breath tested before?
ME - Yes, many, many, many years ago, but it was a bag, with funny crystals back then.
PC - oh yes, we have seen those on UK Gold, haven't we 'insert other officers name here'
ME - [turning to Mr Yv still sitting in the car] Bloody cheek! Can you remember, what IS the maximum sentence for clobbering a cheeky young constable these days?
PC - [laughing more now] So, have you had a drink in the last hour?
ME - No
PC - When was your last drink?
ME - about 3 1/2 hours ago, a small glass of wine and soda with my lunch
PC - OK, I need you blow into this machine, just keep blowing, long and hard until I say stop!
ME - seriously, I am old and a smoker you know!
PC - [now laughing more than I am] go on, give it a go.
So I blow into his machine and a big fat zero on the readout. Nice PC allows me on my way into the services to get a much needed coffee before heading back to London.

Part of me says yes, they have to do it....the other part says no, they could be doing something more....well, re-active in many ways. Bear in mind, that night, a saturday on the M6, 6 officers in total, what else could they be doing? Then I find the 'catching me for breaking the speed limit a little bit' answer and the argument swings right back to yes, random breath testing is a far better use of resources :D
 
I was coming back from playing a gig on the south coast a few years ago, and managed to miss my turning on a larger-than-average roundabout, so had to go around again. I was seen by a WPC and PC in a patrol car and they caught up with me, and asked if I was okay. So there's me, long hair, looking somewhat dishevelled because I'd just been playing a show for the last two hours, missing turnings off a roundabout. So they asked if the car was mine, if it was insured, blah blah blah, and then decided to get me to blow into the little machine. I'm assuming the dilated pupils comment they made was a somewhat pointed way of saying that they thought I'd been smoking special ciggies, which I don't, and I must admit, I didn't really appreciate the stereotype...

The drink test came back completely clear, so they were happy and let me on my way.

Upshot is, I was happy to be tested. The fewer idiots on the road because they've been drinking, the fewer there are that can wreck others' lives, and if random (or suspected) tests are they way they catch offenders, then so be it. It's no skin off my nose to be held up for 2 or 3 minutes.

But I also think that a lot of people have stopped drinking and driving these days. But they drive the next morning while still over the limit. Maybe the police should try to tackle that, or raise public awareness more than it already is, as well as performing the random drink-drive tests at night
 
Yv said:
Part of me says yes, they have to do it....the other part says no, they could be doing something more....well, re-active in many ways. Bear in mind, that night, a saturday on the M6, 6 officers in total, what else could they be doing? Then I find the 'catching me for breaking the speed limit a little bit' answer and the argument swings right back to yes, random breath testing is a far better use of resources :D
Click to expand...

I thought you were going to come out with the one about getting out of the car and being a bit unsteady on your feet and the polis exclaiming "you're staggering"' the correct reply to which is, of course, "aye, you're no bad yerself" ::lol:

Seriously though, "something more re-active"? By that do you mean picking up the pieces afterwards, because that costs much,much more in terms in both cash and man hours, not to mention heartache, than having 6 bobbies stand around in the motorway services for a few hours on a Saturday night....
 
The trouble is I've had a few beers tonight (3 pints) but I'm hoping by the time I drive (later today, but to me tomorrow morning hope I'm not affected.) BTW I did have my last drink at 11.30 pm and although it's past 4.15am now I've had lots of tea and water and won't get in my car before 10.30 am. Still a worry though...
 
MWHCVT said:
and what are your own thoughts on the campaign :thinking: Matt
MWHCVT
Click to expand...

I fully support the random testing campaign, due to a drunk and uninsured driver shattering our family life forever whilst I was a teenager.

As a family we still live with the consequences of that man's actions today.

After a heavy drinking session the night before, this person was still drunk on his way to work the following morning - jumped a red light at a "T" junction, ploughed into the oncoming traffic and caused a major accident which has resulted in irreparable and life changing consequences within our family to this day.

I only wish there was a Breathalyzer / immobilzer immediately above the steering wheel so if any alcohol is detected the vehicle is instantly immobilized.

Drink driving can wreck lives and families - usually someone else's.

I'm no killjoy but drinking and driving are a lethal combination.

It's hard to imagine six pints lined up innocently on a bar wrecking a complete family life for decades - but that is the reality for the families who suffer from the consequences of such incidents.

I just wonder if the drunk in question ever thinks about the devastation he caused to my family unit and the lives he changed forever as a result of his late night binge.

Sorry - deeply personal rant over!
 
Last edited:
Total support for the DD campaign, Like most I enjoy a drink or two, Red Wine is my poison. I drive a lot for my job, electrician, and loss of license for drink driving would literally ruin my career and possibly marriage too.

Not worth the risk.

I will drink over the christmas period, my car will stay on the drive though.
 
antihero said:
That doesn't necessarily mean that more people are drink driving though, it might just mean that the right people have been stopped this time around
Click to expand...

If that's the case good - there is no excuse or justification for Drink Driving - especially when people knowingly drive after having too much to drink.

However, if the stops are really random - then an 18% increase in drunks behind the wheel is still something to think about.
 
If you knew without a shadow of a doubt someone had been drinking in a pub, club, party or restaurant (enough to be over the limit) and was proposing to get behind the wheel and drive home - would you phone the police and tell them?
 
i support dd campaign anyone found over limit know the rules previous night drinking no excuse .
 
I also support the DD campain.
Quite a few years ago on the day before my wedding, the tradition was that your work mates dressed you up, paraded you round the town then took you to the pub.
I don't drink (only because I don't like the taste) but one of my so called friends decided it would be a good idea to spike one of my drinks!!! Luckily I could taste the vodka that they had put in my orange so didn't drink it and told the person how stupid they were. Their reply was "I didn't think you'd be able to taste it".
It still makes me shudder when I think that I could've ridden my motorbike 10 miles home under the influence of alcohol.

I personally think that there should be a zero limit to DD. If you've had 1 drink then you shouldn't drive.

I also had a friend who lost his brother to a drink driver and he still drinks & drives.:cuckoo: You'd think he'd know better.
 
Bear a thought for me!

Not that I drink of course :beer:
 
Yv said:
hmmm.... I can never quite decide whether I agree or not and I say that as the ex-wife of a twice convicted drink-driver [no prizes for guessing one of the reasons for 'ex']

However, on Saturday, driving back from Mancunia, I was stopped and tested by a random check at Knutsford services on the M6. The conversation went something like this....

PC - Driver can you come to the front of the car please?
ME - Yes [exits car]
PC - You may have guessed, we are doing seasonal random checks for drink driving
ME - Yes, I guessed that much
PC - go on, how?
ME - well, your flashing christmas lights across the normal entrance was a bit of a giveaway
PC - [laughing], I know, we love them, we feel so festive! Have you ever been breath tested before?
ME - Yes, many, many, many years ago, but it was a bag, with funny crystals back then.
PC - oh yes, we have seen those on UK Gold, haven't we 'insert other officers name here'
ME - [turning to Mr Yv still sitting in the car] Bloody cheek! Can you remember, what IS the maximum sentence for clobbering a cheeky young constable these days?
PC - [laughing more now] So, have you had a drink in the last hour?
ME - No
PC - When was your last drink?
ME - about 3 1/2 hours ago, a small glass of wine and soda with my lunch
PC - OK, I need you blow into this machine, just keep blowing, long and hard until I say stop!
ME - seriously, I am old and a smoker you know!
PC - [now laughing more than I am] go on, give it a go.
So I blow into his machine and a big fat zero on the readout. Nice PC allows me on my way into the services to get a much needed coffee before heading back to London.

Part of me says yes, they have to do it....the other part says no, they could be doing something more....well, re-active in many ways. Bear in mind, that night, a saturday on the M6, 6 officers in total, what else could they be doing? Then I find the 'catching me for breaking the speed limit a little bit' answer and the argument swings right back to yes, random breath testing is a far better use of resources :D
Click to expand...

Driving 3 and a half hours after having a drink ...I don't think I'd have risked that.

If I drink, I do not drive. Simple :)
 
Are the police allowed to just have random breath tests?

I thought they had to stop you for some other suspicion of an offence, I know they could turn around and say 'We thought we saw you swerve the car a little'

I was in a DD accident when I was 11 - look what it has done to me.

The DD campaign is good but I do feel a little on the fence of those that had maybe been to a party the night before and are tested at 8 am, those that fail presumably are lying about how much they had to drink or what time they stopped drinking but as everyone's metabolism is different, is the test of the machines accurate enough for each person?

What about the drugs issue too, we need a test for that.
 
rhody said:
If you knew without a shadow of a doubt someone had been drinking in a pub, club, party or restaurant (enough to be over the limit) and was proposing to get behind the wheel and drive home - would you phone the police and tell them?
Click to expand...

I have taken my friends car keys from him to stop them.

If I had a friend who would drink and drive, they would no longer be my friend. I would stop them if I saw them.
 
Dale_d3100 said:
I have taken my friends car keys from him to stop them.

If I had a friend who would drink and drive, they would no longer be my friend. I would stop them if I saw them.
Click to expand...
1 pint, 1/2 a pint.... a shandy bass, a box of liqueur chocolates or 4 brandy filled mince pies - at what extent do you stop your friend from driving?
 
rhody said:
If you knew without a shadow of a doubt someone had been drinking in a pub, club, party or restaurant (enough to be over the limit) and was proposing to get behind the wheel and drive home - would you phone the police and tell them?
Click to expand...

Without a second thought. I couldn't live with myself if I didn't and some innocent party was killed or seriously injured as a consequence. Drink drivers are irresponsible idiots - they get no sympathy from me.
 
Flash In The Pan said:
You shouldn't have been drinking or driving at that age :naughty:
Click to expand...

Yeah, that gets said a lot.

Is there a statistic that can show actual increase or decrease in DD that caused accidents or because they were breathalysed due to being involved in an accident.

For example, I am happily sitting in my car at the lights when I am rear ended..it is quite bad and the police are called. The police man smells booze on me and I am breathalysed, fail and I lose my licence because of another persons fault regarding causing the crash. Are there stats for this kind of DD.

Jeepers I am bored.
 
Sorry but it would be your own fault for losing your licence - not the other driver.
 
tiler65 said:
1 pint, 1/2 a pint.... a shandy bass, a box of liqueur chocolates or 4 brandy filled mince pies - at what extent do you stop your friend from driving?
Click to expand...

It is a very valid comment, everybody's body [that sounds SO grammatically wrong for some reason] works differently. Tori has picked up the fact I had one small glass of wine as a spritzer, half and half with soda btw, with food and soft drinks, 3 1/2 hours before driving - that gave me a zero reading - there are people for whom it would have given a noticable reading. There are others for whom 3 times that amount would still have read zero that many hours later [not something I have ever had any desire to find out about personally] - this may or may not mean they still fine to drive and that's the problem, a breath test cannot tell you how the alcohol is affecting the body. I would guess that in a normal 'pulled over' situation, experience of the officer and your own behaviour might dictate whether you were asked to undertake further tests 'down at the station' but not sure. I guess until the technology is there to do it better, they have to use what is at their disposal.

Mind you, as Mr Yv has been known to ruefully say whilst we witness the appalling driving standards around London, 'sometimes I think you would be safer sitting in a car with a drunken Michael Schumacher than some of this lot stone cold sober' :cuckoo:

However, generally speaking [and in answer to Graham] I am not against random testing, I approve of it. [I do remember many years ago, the b/f of my flatmate was legless and determined to drive, wouldn't let us near his keys. Luckily, I worked in the motor trade even back then, so used my flat key to unlock his aging Datsun, popped the bonnet and removed the rotor arm from under the distributor cap, less obvious than a lead, while she kept him distracted. Job done, car wasn't going anywhere that night, or before mid afternoon the following day when I gave it him back] My questioning is more about use of resources - 6 fully trained police officers seems like a lot to me, is there a better way, especially given we now have a both regular and traffic 'plastic plod' - is there a better way? I have seen similar set ups for random testing on a regular basis - 2 or 3 officers I can understand, 6 seems excessive. :shrug:

As for the DD campaigns as a whole, yes, totally approve, governments spend our taxes on far less worthy things. I often hear the cry of 'education' but in this case, how much further can you take education? They have pretty much tried everything, officers and victims in schools, hard hitting TV campaigns, random testing, etc etc -

Tom - I think they can test for drugs now too, though that might be 'suspicion' based and a blood test back at base too, but would need someone more in the know than me to answer that accurately.
 
rhody said:
If you knew without a shadow of a doubt someone had been drinking in a pub, club, party or restaurant (enough to be over the limit) and was proposing to get behind the wheel and drive home - would you phone the police and tell them?
Click to expand...

Well speaking as a former bar manager, yeah I call the police as a last resort...I should probably explain the last resort thing, I would try and take their car key's a first option telling them that they could collect them the following day when sober or I would offer them a lift hope, since it was a Rugby club I knew 90% of my customers and considered a fair proportion of good friends have grown up in that club :thumbs: but that said I've phoned the police on a few occasions to report drink drivers :shrug: I wouldn't be able to sleep at night if I didn't when I knew someone was DDing

Matt
 
Islander said:
Sorry but it would be your own fault for losing your licence - not the other driver.
Click to expand...

I agree but who was driving safer as is the real point to the question.

One of the biggest problems of our driving in this country is eye tests or lack of them for driving capability.

A test at 25 yards reading a number plate when taking your test (it was when I did it at 17) and not another one until you are in your 70's.

Any bad driving is not acceptable, some folk may not drink and drive but they speed or drive with balding tyres and not with so great brakes etc. but for some reason DD gets the worst publicity.
 
MWHCVT said:
Well speaking as a former bar manager, yeah I call the police as a last resort...I should probably explain the last resort thing, I would try and take their car key's a first option telling them that they could collect them the following day when sober or I would offer them a lift hope, since it was a Rugby club I knew 90% of my customers and considered a fair proportion of good friends have grown up in that club :thumbs: but that said I've phoned the police on a few occasions to report drink drivers :shrug: I wouldn't be able to sleep at night if I didn't when I knew someone was DDing

Matt
Click to expand...

But would you phone the police if you knew a customer was driving with a bald tyre or brake lights out? Where do we draw the line?
 
I have an over strength (it seems sometimes) sense of personal responsibility, add that without my driving license I have no job and remembrances of an alcoholic father who probably never drove sober in his latter years... I won't even drink the day before if I'm driving, I have too much to lose.
 
tiler65 said:
I agree but who was driving safer as is the real point to the question.
Click to expand...

He might have been avoiding a drunk, or rear ended himself by a drink driver. You could go on inventing scenarios till the cows come home but it wouldn't change the fact or the law.

You would have been charged because you broke the law not because you were driving badly. He 'may' have been charged with a driving offense as well for his part, hypothetically.
 
tiler65 said:
I agree but who was driving safer as is the real point to the question.

One of the biggest problems of our driving in this country is eye tests or lack of them for driving capability.

A test at 25 yards reading a number plate when taking your test (it was when I did it at 17) and not another one until you are in your 70's.

Any bad driving is not acceptable, some folk may not drink and drive but they speed or drive with balding tyres and not with so great brakes etc. but for some reason DD gets the worst publicity.
Click to expand...

I suspect that drink driving gets the worst (or rather best) publicity because it causes more deaths and injuries overall. It's also been a long campaign to get the public to realise that it's unacceptable - I can still remember a news clip from the late 60s with people being indignant that the government were interfering with their right to go out and have a few drinks and drive home afterwards. I still hear people saying that they drive better after a few drinks. :cuckoo:

Police do spot checks here for things like tyre condition - usually as a pre-winter campaign and people do end up with points on their licence as a result.

I agree with the eyesight thing too - I reckon that they should insist on an eyetest as a part of the 10 year licence renewal.
 
Last edited:
DD is not necessarily drunk driving though Steep and how did the rear ender know that the driver in front had been drinking?
 
Again, sorry but if a driver is over the limit prescribed by law then it IS drink driving. Whether they're caught as a result of their own misdemeanour or anothers, it makes no difference whatsoever. I'd look at someone being caught that way as serendipity - it may have prevented an unnecessary death or injury.
 
Islander said:
I suspect that drink driving gets the worst (or rather best) publicity because it causes more deaths and injuries overall.
l.
Click to expand...

But I asked earlier...are there stats to back this up? Every day people die or are injured on the roads but we don't see them in the news as DD accidents.
 
I've never checked the stats but they exist. Try the ONS for a start :)

People who are injured as a result of other incidents are reported in the overall figures but not as a part of the DD figures if alcohol wasn't a factor (i.e. all drivers involved were under the limit).
 
tiler65 said:
But would you phone the police if you knew a customer was driving with a bald tyre or brake lights out? Where do we draw the line?
Click to expand...

Well since the question that was asked related to DD I don't really see the point of the question, but since you've asked I find defective lights to be one of the most annoying and pathetic motoring offences :shrug: I really wish the police would be more active on this one, it takes literally a few minutes to chance a bulb and costs only a couple of quid to do :shrug: if I get a defective light I change it at the first possible occasion :thumbs: as to the bold tyres yeah I would report them if I knew but I was answering the question as a former bar manager, if you think I had the time to perform a mini MOT on all my patrons cars then you have clearly never worked in the licenced trade :shake:

Matt
 
Not to take the moral high ground but attitudes towards drinking and driving, driving a vehicle without tax mot, insurance etc must change and unfortunately a large proportion of the problem is with the lowlife unemployable sector of our now destroyed society.

It's very very depressing.
 
I have just tried to find out from the ONS and it is quite hard to do as there are stats regarding all accidents and then a set for DD but I cannot find in the overall stats the proportion that involve DD and looking at basic figures it appears there are more deaths involving non DD incidents but the stats are are all over the place.

What is good is though is that the trend for fatalities and serious injury is on the decrease.
 
Last edited:
I'm on the "if you drink, don't drive" bandwagon here.

Personally I think there are some daft arguments, morning after, accident not my fault etc. IMO If you are behind the wheel of a car and are over the legal limit it makes no odds whose fault the accident is/was you should not have been behind the wheel. Cars are dangerous things when not treated with respect. If you want to increase the chance of killing yourself then it's your own stupid fault but if your risking the life of an innocent other then your just being plain selfish.

The laws are in place, everyone is aware of the effects of alcohol and penalties for driving under the influence and have no sympathy for anyone who dis-obeys them.

What was it Clarkson said about familys, outside and shot...
 
MWHCVT said:
Well since the question that was asked related to DD I don't really see the point of the question, but since you've asked I find defective lights to be one of the most annoying and pathetic motoring offences :shrug: I really wish the police would be more active on this one, it takes literally a few minutes to chance a bulb and costs only a couple of quid to do :shrug: if I get a defective light I change it at the first possible occasion :thumbs: as to the bold tyres yeah I would report them if I knew but I was answering the question as a former bar manager, if you think I had the time to perform a mini MOT on all my patrons cars then you have clearly never worked in the licenced trade :shake:

Matt
Click to expand...

Brake lights not working are not necessarily a bulb problem.

Matt it has nothing to do with the licensed trade, it is to do with your morality on phoning the police. How can you tell who is over the DD limit?
 
Islander said:
I've never checked the stats but they exist. Try the ONS for a start :)

People who are injured as a result of other incidents are reported in the overall figures but not as a part of the DD figures if alcohol wasn't a factor (i.e. all drivers involved were under the limit).
Click to expand...

I just did, can find stats for Scotland and Wales, but not England, its a very frustrating website....however, THIS report is from last years stats gathered in 2009. 380 killed in accidents where alcohol was involved [bear in mind that might well include drunken pedestrians staggering out in front of cars, it doesn't specify] and 2222 killed in total. My brain isn't enough in gear to try and extrapolate injury comparisions too, and again, there are no specifics as to the type of accident. I am only saying this because the Welsh report on the ONS site mentions that the figure involving alcohol is a 'significant' minority of overall figures and that includes incidents involving pedestrians - so I guess either way is meant, DD'ers hitting them and them wandering out infront of moving traffic. :shrug:


Anyway, a few stats for Tom, he can find the rest himself, I need to go but dog food before the russells start eating me :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top