Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
14730 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #789194 29-Mar-2013 11:52
Send private message

alasta: There have been a couple of occasions when I have been breath tested after having drunk the maximum safe amount according to my guidelines (which isn't very much) and on both occasions I was able to see the 'no alcohol' reading on the display.

So, even if we did impose a zero limit I would suspect that the limitations of the detection equipment used would make it impossible to enforce.


That is not true.

1) The equipment can probably be re-calibrated to measure ANY alcohol. Since the present limit is high, they probably don't concern themselves with accuracy below a certain point at the moment. If we can put men on the moon I am sure we can measure breath alcohol even if we need new machines.

2) Mandatory blood tests following accidents would catch anyone. Admittedly too late to prevent whatever damage that they have caused.





14730 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #789196 29-Mar-2013 11:54
Send private message

joker97: limit vs drinks is very unreliable

basically amount (rate) of absorption of ethanol from intestines (not stomach) vs volume of distribution of entire body

amount/volume = concentration

depends on so many factors

so if you have quick stomach empyting like - empty stomach and you drink a jug and you get tested straightaway - you will have low blood concentration coz hasn't had time to absorb yet

quick stomach emptying, drink a jug, get tested at 90 mins - you will be BUSTED

huge guy with slow stomach emptying (full of fatty food) or some other reason, drink a jug, you may not be busted when ever you get tested because if you let bits of alcohol into the intestines slowly it gets distributed to a big body volume = low concentration

but take a huge guy, drink a jug along with fatty food, get tested the next morning - watch out! (here it depends on the rate of ELIMINATION of drug ... i don't know what the rate is sorry, or whether it is highly variable between persons but presumably it is, like most things)

but the most important factors are stomach emptying rate, body size, time from consumption to breath test


Precisely why a zero limit is the only sane answer. No one can be confused over how many beers or whatever they can have and remain legal. 





 
 
 
 


117 posts

Master Geek


  #789198 29-Mar-2013 11:55
Send private message

See I am not sure about that, I often register no alcohol right up to half a box (I am well over 100kgs though)

Blood testing definitely should be compulsory after a crash, I know so many people that had crashes under the influence of drugs, and got to walk away laughing about how lucky they were.

4694 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  #789201 29-Mar-2013 12:00
Send private message

Geektastic:
alasta: There have been a couple of occasions when I have been breath tested after having drunk the maximum safe amount according to my guidelines (which isn't very much) and on both occasions I was able to see the 'no alcohol' reading on the display.

So, even if we did impose a zero limit I would suspect that the limitations of the detection equipment used would make it impossible to enforce.


That is not true.

1) The equipment can probably be re-calibrated to measure ANY alcohol. Since the present limit is high, they probably don't concern themselves with accuracy below a certain point at the moment. If we can put men on the moon I am sure we can measure breath alcohol even if we need new machines.


It sounds like you are making guesses and assumptions here. My own guess/assumption would be that measuring the volume of alcohol in someone's blood based on traces in their breath is far from an exact science.

2) Mandatory blood tests following accidents would catch anyone. Admittedly too late to prevent whatever damage that they have caused.


I have concerns about this from a civil liberties perspective.

Look, I really find it difficult to believe that anyone could reasonably misjudge what is a safe level. If I have two beers and then drive a couple of hours later I can't see how there could be any room to be thinking "maybe I shouldn't have had those last two sips"...

14730 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #789214 29-Mar-2013 12:47
Send private message

alasta:
Geektastic:
alasta: There have been a couple of occasions when I have been breath tested after having drunk the maximum safe amount according to my guidelines (which isn't very much) and on both occasions I was able to see the 'no alcohol' reading on the display.

So, even if we did impose a zero limit I would suspect that the limitations of the detection equipment used would make it impossible to enforce.


That is not true.

1) The equipment can probably be re-calibrated to measure ANY alcohol. Since the present limit is high, they probably don't concern themselves with accuracy below a certain point at the moment. If we can put men on the moon I am sure we can measure breath alcohol even if we need new machines.


It sounds like you are making guesses and assumptions here. My own guess/assumption would be that measuring the volume of alcohol in someone's blood based on traces in their breath is far from an exact science.

2) Mandatory blood tests following accidents would catch anyone. Admittedly too late to prevent whatever damage that they have caused.


I have concerns about this from a civil liberties perspective.

Look, I really find it difficult to believe that anyone could reasonably misjudge what is a safe level. If I have two beers and then drive a couple of hours later I can't see how there could be any room to be thinking "maybe I shouldn't have had those last two sips"...


That is partly why a fail at the roadside has you heading to the cop shop for a blood test and, in any case, the Police are already enforcing a zero limit for a segment of motorists under 20. We can but hope that they will learn from that restriction and not turn into irresponsible fools when they turn 20.

I have no concerns about that from a civil liberties pov. A bit less focus on liberties and a bit more focus on civil responsibilities would improve things here no end.





1340 posts

Uber Geek


  #789235 29-Mar-2013 13:31
Send private message

Limit should be near enough to zero as to be zero.

8 hours bottle to throttle is the minimum recommended for pilots (military and many airlines require 12 hours). I see no reason why drivers should be any different.




---
James Sleeman
I sell lots of stuff for electronic enthusiasts...


14730 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #789252 29-Mar-2013 14:02
Send private message

sleemanj: Limit should be near enough to zero as to be zero.

8 hours bottle to throttle is the minimum recommended for pilots (military and many airlines require 12 hours). I see no reason why drivers should be any different.


Agreed. 12 hours might not be enough either considering the prodigious quantity of booze some people seem capable of downing!Frown





 
 
 
 


6389 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #789290 29-Mar-2013 15:28
Send private message

sleemanj: 8 hours bottle to throttle is the minimum recommended for pilots (military and many airlines require 12 hours). I see no reason why drivers should be any different.


There's a big difference between someone in control of a multi-tonne aircraft with a few hundred lives in their hands, and you in your car.

I don't think 0 is a good limit, however a lower limit is fine.  I only have a couple beers if I know I still have to drive home.  If it was 0, how long before all the alcohol has gone from my system and I'd be ok to drive?

How about increasing the penalties for those caught drink driving? Just like a disqualified driver, why not take their car off them for 28 days?  Would help you think long and hard about driving after a few.

1340 posts

Uber Geek


  #789307 29-Mar-2013 16:41
Send private message

nate: 
There's a big difference between someone in control of a multi-tonne aircraft with a few hundred lives in their hands, and you in your car.


The 8 hour restriction is in place for even single seat aircraft.  

Doesn't matter what you are flying, or driving, alcohol is a *needless* impairment.  Nobody needs to drink alcohol in order to live (certain toxicological acute situations excepted).






---
James Sleeman
I sell lots of stuff for electronic enthusiasts...


4694 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  #789314 29-Mar-2013 17:25
Send private message

sleemanj:
nate: 
There's a big difference between someone in control of a multi-tonne aircraft with a few hundred lives in their hands, and you in your car.


The 8 hour restriction is in place for even single seat aircraft.  

Doesn't matter what you are flying, or driving, alcohol is a *needless* impairment.  Nobody needs to drink alcohol in order to live (certain toxicological acute situations excepted).


If you have one beer over lunch and then drive home at the end of the day, let's say four hours later, how much of a risk are you relative to the risks associated with:
- Driving a vehicle that is under maintained.
- Driving a vehicle that lacks modern safety equipment such as ESC, airbags, seat belt pretensioners, etc.
- Lax driver training or procedures.
- Driver fatique.
- Cabin distractions such as phones and audio equipment.

There are far more pressing issues for road safety than worrying about whether someone had a beer eight hours ago or six hours ago.



22934 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #789315 29-Mar-2013 17:26
Send private message

nate:
sleemanj: 8 hours bottle to throttle is the minimum recommended for pilots (military and many airlines require 12 hours). I see no reason why drivers should be any different.


There's a big difference between someone in control of a multi-tonne aircraft with a few hundred lives in their hands, and you in your car.

I don't think 0 is a good limit, however a lower limit is fine.  I only have a couple beers if I know I still have to drive home.  If it was 0, how long before all the alcohol has gone from my system and I'd be ok to drive?

How about increasing the penalties for those caught drink driving? Just like a disqualified driver, why not take their car off them for 28 days?  Would help you think long and hard about driving after a few.


Well  the penalties are already 6 months no driving and that doesn't deter people (Though I know a few people who thought they were genuinely well below who have been a tiny bit over (Which isn't acceptable) who suffered through 6 months no license. 

Making it a year wouldn't make any difference, if you can cope for 6 months, a year isn't going to make it worse. It's not going to make you think any harder about it. I'd say 80% of people who are caught drink driving believe they are safely under the limit and are surprised. The only way to ensure no more surprises is to make the limit perhaps not zero, but low enough to stop cough medicine causing you 6 months no driving, but making people who do drink, realize they can't drink anything and drive.



22934 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #789316 29-Mar-2013 17:29
Send private message

alasta:
sleemanj:
nate: 
There's a big difference between someone in control of a multi-tonne aircraft with a few hundred lives in their hands, and you in your car.


The 8 hour restriction is in place for even single seat aircraft.  

Doesn't matter what you are flying, or driving, alcohol is a *needless* impairment.  Nobody needs to drink alcohol in order to live (certain toxicological acute situations excepted).


If you have one beer over lunch and then drive home at the end of the day, let's say four hours later, how much of a risk are you relative to the risks associated with:
- Driving a vehicle that is under maintained.
- Driving a vehicle that lacks modern safety equipment such as ESC, airbags, seat belt pretensioners, etc.
- Lax driver training or procedures.
- Driver fatique.
- Cabin distractions such as phones and audio equipment.

There are far more pressing issues for road safety than worrying about whether someone had a beer eight hours ago or six hours ago.


I think you are angling at this all wrong, these things above are things you are also already REQUIRED to ensure aren't a problem when you drive.

At the end of the day in all your points you have yet (I believe) to make one that justifies the requirement or benefit of being allowed to drink and drive?

Mad Scientist
22655 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #789320 29-Mar-2013 17:38
Send private message

can't be zero. mathematics won't allow it ... washout curve of any substance in theory never reaches zero until infinity (asymptote)





Involuntary autocorrect in operation on mobile device. Apologies in advance.


4694 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  #789324 29-Mar-2013 17:41
Send private message

networkn: I think you are angling at this all wrong, these things above are things you are also already REQUIRED to ensure aren't a problem when you drive.


And yet the degree of non compliance is enormous.

At the end of the day in all your points you have yet (I believe) to make one that justifies the requirement or benefit of being allowed to drink and drive?


What is the benefit of drinking alcohol at all? Should we just ban alcohol altogether? After all plenty of people die in alcohol related incidents which do not involve drinking and driving.

Every now and again I like to go out with friends for a meal. I like to have a glass of wine. I can't justify why I like to do that - it's just the way I am.



22934 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #789340 29-Mar-2013 18:35
Send private message

alasta:
networkn: I think you are angling at this all wrong, these things above are things you are also already REQUIRED to ensure aren't a problem when you drive.


And yet the degree of non compliance is enormous.

At the end of the day in all your points you have yet (I believe) to make one that justifies the requirement or benefit of being allowed to drink and drive?


What is the benefit of drinking alcohol at all? Should we just ban alcohol altogether? After all plenty of people die in alcohol related incidents which do not involve drinking and driving.

Every now and again I like to go out with friends for a meal. I like to have a glass of wine. I can't justify why I like to do that - it's just the way I am.


Well the degree of non compliance with Alcohol with drinking is too. 

I don't see any upside to drinking alcohol which is why I don't and never have, so I am the wrong person to be on that side of the argument. If I had my way there wouldn't be any drinking, downsides definately worse than upsides from everything I've ever seen. 

Lastly, I am not saying you shouldn't go out with your friends and drink if you wish, but why can't you :

1) Get a Taxi home (or any of the other services that get you and your car home).
2) Designate a Sober driver.

In case you consider using cost as a factor, if you can afford to drink, you can afford a taxi. If you can't afford both, don't do either!


1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic




News »

Pre-orders for Huawei MateBook 13 open now
Posted 14-Aug-2020 14:26


Freeview On Demand app launches on Sony Android TVs
Posted 6-Aug-2020 13:35


UFB hits more than one million connections
Posted 6-Aug-2020 09:42


D-Link A/NZ extends COVR Wi-Fi EasyMesh System series with new three-pack
Posted 4-Aug-2020 15:01


New Zealand software Rfider tracks coffee from Colombia all the way to New Zealand businesses
Posted 3-Aug-2020 10:35


Logitech G launches Pro X Wireless gaming headset
Posted 3-Aug-2020 10:21


Sony Alpha 7S III provides supreme imaging performance
Posted 3-Aug-2020 10:11


Sony introduces first CFexpress Type A memory card
Posted 3-Aug-2020 10:05


Marsello acquires Goody consolidating online and in-store marketing position
Posted 30-Jul-2020 16:26


Fonterra first major customer for Microsoft's New Zealand datacentre
Posted 30-Jul-2020 08:07


Everything we learnt at the IBM Cloud Forum 2020
Posted 29-Jul-2020 14:45


Dropbox launches native HelloSign workflow and data residency in Australia
Posted 29-Jul-2020 12:48


Spark launches 5G in Palmerston North
Posted 29-Jul-2020 09:50


Lenovo brings speed and smarter features to new 5G mobile gaming phone
Posted 28-Jul-2020 22:00


Withings raises $60 million to enable bridge between patients and healthcare
Posted 28-Jul-2020 21:51



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.


Support Geekzone »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.