Select to expand quote

remo81 said..
If someone has a few and drives home, and doesn't have an incident, and noone sees them, is it a crime?

Oh, you're taking the p!ss... right???

If someone has a few and is above the blood alcohol content limit for driving, then, yes... it is a crime... [sarcastica]even in Queensland: www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/road-safety/drink-driving/drinking[/sarcastica]

It might also be worth doing some reading on duty of care and tort of negligence... gross negligence. It may also be worth re-sitting the basic theory that one would normally complete (and pass!) to receive a driver licence.

Your behaviour is reckless and illegal... Wishing safety to all those that share the road with you...

Would it be sensible to suggest that in order to be able to consume alcohol and drive, one should have to have an endorsement on their licence. Not just be deemed capable once they are off their Ps?

This would mean, going to a test centre, consuming an amount of alcohol to bring the person to what ever level they are going for. Then perform a driving test. Pass or Fail.

This way we can pick out those that can drive at 0.2 verses those like my wife that cant do the washing up after a glass of wine with dinner.

If you are capable you should be allowed....

The best way to get home from the pub is to drive while wearing a Burka. No one will pull you over. Something about profiling.

Select to expand quote

remo81 said..
Would it be sensible to suggest that in order to be able to consume alcohol and drive, one should have to have an endorsement on their licence. Not just be deemed capable once they are off their Ps?

This would mean, going to a test centre, consuming an amount of alcohol to bring the person to what ever level they are going for. Then perform a driving test. Pass or Fail.

This way we can pick out those that can drive at 0.2 verses those like my wife that cant do the washing up after a glass of wine with dinner.

If you are capable you should be allowed....

The best way to get home from the pub is to drive while wearing a Burka. No one will pull you over. Something about profiling.

Thats twice you've brought muslims up,
Ha, your straight out of Pauline playbook
Yes, you should be allowed to drive drunk, the police should be breath testing to see whose been eating halal certified food

Select to expand quote

brody1 said..
Thats twice you've brought muslims up,
Ha, your straight out of Pauline playbook
Yes, you should be allowed to drive drunk, the police should be breath testing to see whose been eating halal certified food

I didn't bring up Muslims again. I was talking about an article of clothing that cops discriminate against.

I have a few Muslims working for me. There not as bad as you make out. They do as their told.

Select to expand quote

remo81 said..

brody1 said...

remo81 said...

elmo said...
The way I see it Drink drivers kill and injure way more people than sharks ever will.

So I reckon the police should be allowed to "Cull" them after a serious accident

For general drink driving a "catch and release" program. Catch the over the limit, drop them of in the middle of the Simpson Desert let them walk home.

For those who feel I am victimizing or that I am a bit harsh with my attitude towards drink drivers, I've been in constant pain for the last 30 years from my run in with a drink driver in 1985.

There is no excuse or justification for Drink Driving

Thats like saying ban all Muslims because one of them did something wrong.

Ha, we were just reading this thread through and i told my boyfriend, oops, my lawyer, that i bet it wont be long before Remo segways to Muslims........ta-dar....
Yep being harsher through the law on drink driving is exactly the same as the xenophobia that Muslims now face......

Me thinks this is your second account?

What is ur first one?

This has nothing to do with Muslims.

No my hate is specifically aimed at the self righteous rsole drink drivers who think they are not doing any harm by driving home drunk and not hurting anyone. Until they do.

The w4nker who collected me was only 400m from his house, he thought the same, and he almost made it to!

One can only hope that when you do hit someone, it is someone close to you, so you may end up feeling some semblance of remorse, but knowing the prevailing attitude of most drink drivers you'll probably blame it on someone else.

30 years of pain is a long time to build up a slight resentment and what you clowns whinge and b1tch if you lose your license for 6 months.

The real shame is Remo, his lover, opps, lawyer get to benefit greatly from most people complying with the rules
If everyone was as selfish, degenerative or just plain retared as those who boast about driving drunk then it would be a very dangerous place
Respect and love to all those that have ever been affected by people like remo, just shameful!!!!!

Select to expand quote

kiteman69 said..
Mate getten done with 0.1 is no big deal. As far as I'm conserned as long as you are under 0.25 you should be allowed to drive.

No nanny state is going ta stop me either.

Drink and drive and get caught = Bloody Idiot.
Drink and drive and get home = Bloody Legend.

Drink and drive and get caught = bloody idiot
Drink and drive and get home = still a bloody idiot
Grow up ya wanker.

Select to expand quote

remo81 said..

elmo said...
The way I see it Drink drivers kill and injure way more people than sharks ever will.

So I reckon the police should be allowed to "Cull" them after a serious accident

For general drink driving a "catch and release" program. Catch the over the limit, drop them of in the middle of the Simpson Desert let them walk home.

For those who feel I am victimizing or that I am a bit harsh with my attitude towards drink drivers, I've been in constant pain for the last 30 years from my run in with a drink driver in 1985.

There is no excuse or justification for Drink Driving

Thats like saying ban all Muslims because one of them did something wrong.

No its not. But the ones that drink drive double over the limit, drop them also in the desert, just as you would a christian..

Select to expand quote

Underoath said...
Can someone calculate backwards, what his Alcohol content in his blood was if he had 5 hours sleep and weighed 85kg?

I gave it a shot, but my calculation seems too high.


I had it up around 0.29

Weight has a negligible effect on the calculation and sleep none. You need to know what time his last drink was and then what time he did the test and what the reading was. If we guessed at midnight and 10:00am your calculation might be in the ballpark. So his blood alcohol content might not have actually peaked until 3am then it started coming back down. So maybe by 5 or 6 am he's 'sobered up' enough that's he's now just as pissed as he was when the beer stopped flowing at midnight.

Select to expand quote

brody1 said...
The real shame is Remo, his lover, opps, lawyer get to benefit greatly from most people complying with the rules
If everyone was as selfish, degenerative or just plain retared as those who boast about driving drunk then it would be a very dangerous place
Respect and love to all those that have ever been affected by people like remo, just shameful!!!!!

People like me. You mean people that have never been in a car crash. Not even as a passanger.

Yeah I'm really hurting others with my not crashing my car and all.

Select to expand quote

remo81 said...
Do some research. I'm not going to tell you the name of the bloke I use, but the internet will. He has got me off every time. Not even a fine was incurred, although he is not cheap. Like they say, you get what you pay for.

People like you scare me with the "I'm right...alcohol only affects others" attitude. All the scientific testing says alochol - any alcohol - affects reaction times.

You

Are

A danger to yourself and others.

You are just too ignorant and selfish to realise it.

Select to expand quote

kiteman69 said...

Paradox said...

kiteman69 said..
Mate getten done with 0.1 is no big deal. As far as I'm conserned as long as you are under 0.25 you should be allowed to drive.

No nanny state is going ta stop me either.

Drink and drive and get caught = Bloody Idiot.
Drink and drive and get home = Bloody Legend.

Drink and drive and hurt any of my family = even jail won't keep you safe my friend....

Mate, I've got a perfect driving record. Never had an accident no matter how pissed I was. If you have ever had a prang sober or drunk you can not judge me.

Ps. Im always in for a little you me carpark now. But remember you cant win everytime.

And that just says it all...quality quality person.

Select to expand quote

remo81 said..

brody1 said...
The real shame is Remo, his lover, opps, lawyer get to benefit greatly from most people complying with the rules
If everyone was as selfish, degenerative or just plain retared as those who boast about driving drunk then it would be a very dangerous place
Respect and love to all those that have ever been affected by people like remo, just shameful!!!!!

People like me. You mean people that have never been in a car crash. Not even as a passanger.

Yeah I'm really hurting others with my not crashing my car and all.

I guess that's the mindset of every drunk that's been driving pissed and not had an accident yet.

What does it change to after? It wasn't my fault, or I have a good lawyer?

he will probably get about 10 months suspension . and a fine .

Select to expand quote

Imax1 said..

kiteman69 said..
Mate getten done with 0.1 is no big deal. As far as I'm conserned as long as you are under 0.25 you should be allowed to drive.

No nanny state is going ta stop me either.

Drink and drive and get caught = Bloody Idiot.
Drink and drive and get home = Bloody Legend.

Drink and drive and get caught = bloody idiot
Drink and drive and get home = a bloody lucky idiot
Grow up ya wanker.

Fixed that for ya.

Select to expand quote

FormulaNova said...

remo81 said..

brody1 said...
The real shame is Remo, his lover, opps, lawyer get to benefit greatly from most people complying with the rules
If everyone was as selfish, degenerative or just plain retared as those who boast about driving drunk then it would be a very dangerous place
Respect and love to all those that have ever been affected by people like remo, just shameful!!!!!

People like me. You mean people that have never been in a car crash. Not even as a passanger.

Yeah I'm really hurting others with my not crashing my car and all.

I guess that's the mindset of every drunk that's been driving pissed and not had an accident yet.

What does it change to after? It wasn't my fault, or I have a good lawyer?

No. You have it all wrong. It's not an either/or situation.

It's "It's not my fault AND I have good lawyer."

The shame is the vehemence with which they reckon it's fine to drive drunk - "But I am fine officer. I am perfectly capable of driving."

Hopefully if the tools ever have an accident it is a single vehicle, single occupant situation and they don't inflict their idiocy on any innocents.

You got trolled hard . All you lot love to be recreationaly outraged, its like you find it fun or uplifting to tell people that they are so much lower than you. Makes all of you feel prim and propper.

My view still stands that you should have to do a test to be able to DD. Not once you get you open licence you are magically able to control a vehicle when in the .05 limit. For the record I have never been to court for anything.

The original post was about what should he do. There are some Lawyers that can get him off will cost about 5 grand but thats a small price to pay if you are driving employers vehicles and the rest. If he goes in and pleads guilty and tells his story, he will loose his licence for 3 months plus a fine. He will also be able to get a work licence. If he works at all types of hours then it won't really bother him. I've seen heaps of mates and work colleagues go through this one.

Get legal help the block who can get professor to say about body chemistry &how time &food etc &if how after his massive breakfast he would have been under in 20 more minutes because of chemistry **** the right lawyer can do that it will cost as being told.
I don't condone anything its just how it works

Select to expand quote

remo81 said...
You got trolled hard . All you lot love to be recreationaly outraged, its like you find it fun or uplifting to tell people that they are so much lower than you. Makes all of you feel prim and propper.

My view still stands that you should have to do a test to be able to DD. Not once you get you open licence you are magically able to control a vehicle when in the .05 limit. For the record I have never been to court for anything.

The original post was about what should he do. There are some Lawyers that can get him off will cost about 5 grand but thats a small price to pay if you are driving employers vehicles and the rest. If he goes in and pleads guilty and tells his story, he will loose his licence for 3 months plus a fine. He will also be able to get a work licence. If he works at all types of hours then it won't really bother him. I've seen heaps of mates and work colleagues go through this one.

Ha ha! Trolled and your view still stands! That's great! Some people are racist and some people are homophobes... some people are misogynists and others just w@nkers. Those views still stand.

Where was the ruse? Who knows.

An individual driving test might give it away. What are you suggesting? People who wish to drink drive should take tests under controlled conditions at 0.01 BAC increments above 0.05 to determine their safety limit? Sounds costly and dangerous!! How about those that do such a test also wear a giant "w@nker" neon sign on the roof of their cars to alert other drivers of the hazard they pose

Select to expand quote

Chris6791 said...

Underoath said...
Can someone calculate backwards, what his Alcohol content in his blood was if he had 5 hours sleep and weighed 85kg?

I gave it a shot, but my calculation seems too high.


I had it up around 0.29

Weight has a negligible effect on the calculation and sleep none. You need to know what time his last drink was and then what time he did the test and what the reading was. If we guessed at midnight and 10:00am your calculation might be in the ballpark. So his blood alcohol content might not have actually peaked until 3am then it started coming back down. So maybe by 5 or 6 am he's 'sobered up' enough that's he's now just as pissed as he was when the beer stopped flowing at midnight.

The guidelines/rules for BAC calculations are;
1 standard drink = 10grams of alcohol
1 standard drink increases (on average) someone's BAC by 0.02%
The body (on average) processes 1 standard drink out per hour

If he was 0.1% BAC when tested, 5 hours earlier he was 0.2% BAC, if you go by these guidelines issued by drink wise, but there are many variables also to consider.

It doesn't really matter too much when your last drink was, it's more important when your first drink was, the rate of consumption, how much was consumed and what sort of condition your body is in to be able to process the alcohol out of your body.

Select to expand quote

Pugwash said..

remo81 said...
You got trolled hard . All you lot love to be recreationaly outraged, its like you find it fun or uplifting to tell people that they are so much lower than you. Makes all of you feel prim and propper.

My view still stands that you should have to do a test to be able to DD. Not once you get you open licence you are magically able to control a vehicle when in the .05 limit. For the record I have never been to court for anything.

The original post was about what should he do. There are some Lawyers that can get him off will cost about 5 grand but thats a small price to pay if you are driving employers vehicles and the rest. If he goes in and pleads guilty and tells his story, he will loose his licence for 3 months plus a fine. He will also be able to get a work licence. If he works at all types of hours then it won't really bother him. I've seen heaps of mates and work colleagues go through this one.

Ha ha! Trolled and your view still stands! That's great! Some people are racist and some people are homophobes... some people are misogynists and others just w@nkers. Those views still stand.

Where was the ruse? Who knows.

An individual driving test might give it away. What are you suggesting? People who wish to drink drive should take tests under controlled conditions at 0.01 BAC increments above 0.05 to determine their safety limit? Sounds costly and dangerous!! How about those that do such a test also wear a giant "w@nker" neon sign on the roof of their cars to alert other drivers of the hazard they pose

I'm not talking about above 0.05. I'm talking that the starting point should be 0.00. Then build increments to 0.05 and over. In the USA the limit is 0.07. I do not think that the testing should be on the road, it should be at a driver training center. Many of these centers are at motor complexes.

So who pays, the user pays. If you clowns are serious about DD then the limit should be 0.00. The 0.05 limit has been in since the 80's?? I think. What research has been done to say that this limit is too high or could be put higher? None. There is no debate. Just a 30+ year old rule that has not been updated. All you recreationaly outraged social justice warriors say that DD is bad. But its ok if you are under 0.05 because the same scientist that said that smoking is ok for you said that 0.05 is a good limit.....

People are being killed on the on the roads every day because of DD, but parliament is high in debate about gay marriage. WTF.

Maybe if you are going to blow over 0.00 you should have a neon sign on your car, or something. I know that you are taking the piss but its not all that bad an idea.

Select to expand quote

remo81 said...
You got trolled hard . All you lot love to be recreationaly outraged, its like you find it fun or uplifting to tell people that they are so much lower than you. Makes all of you feel prim and propper.

My view still stands that you should have to do a test to be able to DD. Not once you get you open licence you are magically able to control a vehicle when in the .05 limit. For the record I have never been to court for anything.

The original post was about what should he do. There are some Lawyers that can get him off will cost about 5 grand but thats a small price to pay if you are driving employers vehicles and the rest. If he goes in and pleads guilty and tells his story, he will loose his licence for 3 months plus a fine. He will also be able to get a work licence. If he works at all types of hours then it won't really bother him. I've seen heaps of mates and work colleagues go through this one.

Those tests have been done that's why the limit is 0.05. To think you you can safely drive because you are somehow special is fallacious and delusional, but no logical, research based argument is going to sway your ignorant delusions of grandeur. Keep thinking you are different to every other drunk driver - just like every other drunk driver. Do you think all those fools who hurt or killed someone did it the first time they drove drunk? Do you think it will never happen to you? Perhaps throw wearing a seatbelt out the window too since you are so good? Maybe you can use a mobile phone safely while driving because so far you have and haven't caused an accident?

My hope for it to only be you, your car, and a lamppost stands.

Select to expand quote

remo81 said...

Pugwash said..

remo81 said...
You got trolled hard . All you lot love to be recreationaly outraged, its like you find it fun or uplifting to tell people that they are so much lower than you. Makes all of you feel prim and propper.

My view still stands that you should have to do a test to be able to DD. Not once you get you open licence you are magically able to control a vehicle when in the .05 limit. For the record I have never been to court for anything.

The original post was about what should he do. There are some Lawyers that can get him off will cost about 5 grand but thats a small price to pay if you are driving employers vehicles and the rest. If he goes in and pleads guilty and tells his story, he will loose his licence for 3 months plus a fine. He will also be able to get a work licence. If he works at all types of hours then it won't really bother him. I've seen heaps of mates and work colleagues go through this one.

Ha ha! Trolled and your view still stands! That's great! Some people are racist and some people are homophobes... some people are misogynists and others just w@nkers. Those views still stand.

Where was the ruse? Who knows.

An individual driving test might give it away. What are you suggesting? People who wish to drink drive should take tests under controlled conditions at 0.01 BAC increments above 0.05 to determine their safety limit? Sounds costly and dangerous!! How about those that do such a test also wear a giant "w@nker" neon sign on the roof of their cars to alert other drivers of the hazard they pose

I'm not talking about above 0.05. I'm talking that the starting point should be 0.00. Then build increments to 0.05 and over. In the USA the limit is 0.07. I do not think that the testing should be on the road, it should be at a driver training center. Many of these centers are at motor complexes.

So who pays, the user pays. If you clowns are serious about DD then the limit should be 0.00. The 0.05 limit has been in since the 80's?? I think. What research has been done to say that this limit is too high or could be put higher? None. There is no debate. Just a 30+ year old rule that has not been updated. All you recreationaly outraged social justice warriors say that DD is bad. But its ok if you are under 0.05 because the same scientist that said that smoking is ok for you said that 0.05 is a good limit.....

People are being killed on the on the roads every day because of DD, but parliament is high in debate about gay marriage. WTF.

Maybe if you are going to blow over 0.00 you should have a neon sign on your car, or something. I know that you are taking the piss but its not all that bad an idea.

It used to be 0.08 in WA. 0.00 is a better idea as the research says any blood alcohol impinges on reaction time - not yours obviously, but pretty much everyone else except those road warriors who think it doesn't. Because they are so spesh-ul.

Just to answer the original question, not that I condone drink driving what so ever (not saying I'm perfect, far from but I don't condone it), an angle could be to "blame the pub for getting him pissed".

I'm unsure if this has ever been tested, and I'm sure you would need to have the most creative lawyer ever and have the balls to go with such an argument BUT a licenced premises must not have an intoxicated person on their premises (strange but true). If you become intoxicated on the premises, the licencee/approved manager must ask you to leave and has a duty of care to do anything practicable to ensure your safety.

So I'd imagine, if he blew 0.1% in the morning, he was wasted the night before, staggering around, slurring his words, being a good old drunk at the reception. I'd say the licenced premises breeched the law by having an intoxicated person on their premises and should have told him to leave hours before he actually did, THEREFORE he should have woken up much less boozed and should have been OK to drive!!

So it's not his fault, it's the pubs fault!!

It's a long shot but I reckon it has legs!!

Alternatively, cop the punishment on the chin and don't do it again!!

Select to expand quote

thedrip said..

remo81 said...

Pugwash said..

remo81 said...
You got trolled hard . All you lot love to be recreationaly outraged, its like you find it fun or uplifting to tell people that they are so much lower than you. Makes all of you feel prim and propper.

My view still stands that you should have to do a test to be able to DD. Not once you get you open licence you are magically able to control a vehicle when in the .05 limit. For the record I have never been to court for anything.

The original post was about what should he do. There are some Lawyers that can get him off will cost about 5 grand but thats a small price to pay if you are driving employers vehicles and the rest. If he goes in and pleads guilty and tells his story, he will loose his licence for 3 months plus a fine. He will also be able to get a work licence. If he works at all types of hours then it won't really bother him. I've seen heaps of mates and work colleagues go through this one.

Ha ha! Trolled and your view still stands! That's great! Some people are racist and some people are homophobes... some people are misogynists and others just w@nkers. Those views still stand.

Where was the ruse? Who knows.

An individual driving test might give it away. What are you suggesting? People who wish to drink drive should take tests under controlled conditions at 0.01 BAC increments above 0.05 to determine their safety limit? Sounds costly and dangerous!! How about those that do such a test also wear a giant "w@nker" neon sign on the roof of their cars to alert other drivers of the hazard they pose

I'm not talking about above 0.05. I'm talking that the starting point should be 0.00. Then build increments to 0.05 and over. In the USA the limit is 0.07. I do not think that the testing should be on the road, it should be at a driver training center. Many of these centers are at motor complexes.

So who pays, the user pays. If you clowns are serious about DD then the limit should be 0.00. The 0.05 limit has been in since the 80's?? I think. What research has been done to say that this limit is too high or could be put higher? None. There is no debate. Just a 30+ year old rule that has not been updated. All you recreationaly outraged social justice warriors say that DD is bad. But its ok if you are under 0.05 because the same scientist that said that smoking is ok for you said that 0.05 is a good limit.....

People are being killed on the on the roads every day because of DD, but parliament is high in debate about gay marriage. WTF.

Maybe if you are going to blow over 0.00 you should have a neon sign on your car, or something. I know that you are taking the piss but its not all that bad an idea.

It used to be 0.08 in WA. 0.00 is a better idea as the research says any blood alcohol impinges on reaction time - not yours obviously, but pretty much everyone else except those road warriors who think it doesn't. Because they are so spesh-ul.

You just love being outraged.

Ok so all people are not equal. People have different tolerances for different things. People also have different capabilities. Some people are really good at football. Some people are not. Its a fact of life. Some people are really good at driving cars, some people are not. Some people are forgetful, others have great memories.

Some people are flat out driving a car safely when they are 0.00, let alone if they are 0.05. Are you getting what I am saying. Or are you too stooped...

People should be tested and judged on their abilities. Not just have some general rule.

I am quite pleased that most of the posters here saw the negatives of DD. Some people still believed that they are a special breed who can actually still function perfectly even at or well over the legal limit. Actually, I know of some long term alcoholics who can still do the normal things when pissed. These people were my ex-work mates in the mine fields. Of course, that was long before mandatory breath testing.

Even though they can still do the work they had been doing for the last 20 odd years, like working a Jumbo, or driving a truck, but I suspect they are running on automatic, ie. in robotic mode. The trouble is they may not be able to deal with the unexpected, eg. an emergency, or machine mal-functioning.

One of these persons was an underground air-leg miner. He earned a very good wage, but saved bugger all. Most, if not all, of what he made, was pissed down the urinal at the local pub ! A top bloke, but you wouldn't want to sit opposite him for longer than necessary. His alcoholic breath was awful. The last I heard of him wasn't good. He had developed the dreaded "shake" possibly due to the fact that his brain was in a permanent pickled state. He was only 45, but looked 60. Poor bastard.

The same with DD on our roads. Drunks may be able to continue driving in robotic mode. Unfortunately, their reaction time and the reaction itself are compromised greatly.

I believe the alcohol limit such as "0.05" ought to be changed. The reason being people wrongly believe "0.05" is such a tiny amount, and it should do any harm. I suggest it should be magnified by a factor of 1000. So "0.05" is 50 units. "0.2" is 200 units. To book someone over 50 sounds a lot more serious than "0.05", don't you agree ?

Do the crime, do the time. Everyone knows the rules. Stop whinging.

Remo, you need a long hard look in the mirror. Everyone else is wrong, but you are different?

All the research on alcohol impairing function doesn't apply to you? What a beauty!

I understand your argument but reject it as ill informed and based on a fantasy justifying your own unacceptable behaviour.

Alcohol impairs everyone's ability to drive. Whatever your driving ability is sober is worse with alcohol in your system. And you think that is okay obviously. Perhaps I am wrong and you are such a markedly better driver than everyone else that being drunk only brings you back to average. Science says you are wrong so I can only hope your little fantasy gets popped sooner rather than later. Then again, with your record, nothing will change the fervour with which you believe yourself different to and better than everyone else.

BTW, I'm done because nothing anyone says will change special people like you.

I stand by my single car/single occupant hope - any other outcome would be an avoidable tragedy.

Select to expand quote

remo81 said...

brody1 said...
The real shame is Remo, his lover, opps, lawyer get to benefit greatly from most people complying with the rules
If everyone was as selfish, degenerative or just plain retared as those who boast about driving drunk then it would be a very dangerous place
Respect and love to all those that have ever been affected by people like remo, just shameful!!!!!

People like me. You mean people that have never been in a car crash. Not even as a passanger.

Yeah I'm really hurting others with my not crashing my car and all.

There is no one else like you, after all there can only be one hardest man on the water, your data suggests otherwise, well done and keep practising
Tool, sorry, troll...