Friday, July 10, 2015

Oi Stevie Im not just disappointed,



I am actually not surprised and more than a little pissed off.

Olivia Wannan at Offsetting Behaviour reports on how the lower Drink Driving changes last December have failed and alcohol related deaths in Road crashes have just continued,  albeit at a slightly higher rate.

Superintendent Steve Greally, national road policing manager, said he would be disappointed if ultimately the new drink-drive limit had no effect on road deaths.

Steve your obsessive fixation on alcohol in the current environment is legs wide open to such an outcome.
Skill levels, weather, road quality, vehicle suitability, distraction from any or all of;  music, scenery, equipment, pagers, phones,  passengers, pets and concentration  are all becoming apparent as the road toll and vehicle volumes conspire to subvert  any statistical advantage the wowserism might produce.

Add in substances other than,  or in combination with alcohol, including prescription and illegal drugs, and it would be entirely possible lowering the alcohol  level to zero might well produce a very similar result to that which Olivia has discovered and reported.
So Stevie,  traffic dumbarse wowser in chief, would that have you astounded, bitterly disappointed, flabbergasted or what degree of faux surprise will you be choosing next.

Metal jacketed projectiles at speeds of up to 100 kph carrying fragile bits of flesh and blood will result in dead tissue when a rapid deceleration occurs.

One outcome of your now becoming draconian emphasis on whether a driver will be incapacitated by having a jug of beer at the days end has impacted on behaviour,  as I suggested when implemented late last year,   in the main only if Olivia's report is correct, in the economic activity in what was a very beneficial social activity around the neighbourhood watering holes particularly in areas sans taxi options.
Meanwhile poor driving, poor decision making, inexperience and plain dumb behaviour still leads to a stubborn statistical fact, bad things happen.



8 comments:

pdm said...

Get the recidivist drink drivers off the road by all means. As I have suggested many times over the years - one months gaol and a year disqualification for all second offenders and ones years gaol, confiscation and sale of the vehicle irrespective of ownership and disqualification for life for all 3rd timers.

In enforcing that you will go a large way to solving the drink driving problem but you also need to restore the old 400mg? level so I can have a couple of pints without fear of being caught as I did for 50 years without incident before the recent draconian and ineffective changes.

Howie said...

"Meanwhile poor driving, poor decision making....and plain dumb behaviour still leads to a stubborn statistical fact, bad things happen."

When people drink these things occur more frequently. But then you're an idiot aren't you?

Howie said...

"you also need to restore the old 400mg? level so I can have a couple of pints without fear of being caught "

You just have to have those pints eh? No choice. Why not three? or six? You're a great driver and can handle it right?

pdm said...

So Howie you do not think recidivist drink drivers, usually with readings at least twice the old limits should be punished while I should be for having a couple of quiet beers and driving home easily within the old limit.

Psycho Milt said...

Howie just lacks interest in evidence-based policy-making is all. This policy's all about helping people live the lifestyle earnest middle-class types think they should be living, so evidence can go get fucked. When it comes to policies about recreational drug use, rationality never even gets a look-in.

Howie said...

"you do not think recidivist drink drivers, usually with readings at least twice the old limits should be punished"

They are. There is a graduated set of sanctions for drink-driving, which ends with instant license revocation and heavy fines. Driving while disqualified results in vehicle confiscation.

"while I should be for having a couple of quiet beers and driving home easily within the old limit."

You can do that under the new limit. Stop whining.

"This policy's all about helping people live the lifestyle earnest middle-class types think they should be living, so evidence can go get fucked."

Silly strawman you've built there chum. Akin to saying you're a tool of the brewing industry which has an obvious interest in allowing as much drink-driving as it can successfully argue for.

gravedodger said...

It has been only seven months so Olivia's analysis could be a blip in stats that are seriously open to erroneous outcomes due to so many accidents, even those involving serious injury and a subsequent death not receiving the scrutiny and recording of those where the fatality is confirmed in the immediate aftermath of the smash.

The impairment of a driver in the range of BAC between the old limit and the reduced one as of last December is so potentially flawed due to body mass, recent food ingestion, tiredness, ability to process alcohol, traffic volumes, safety rating of the vehicle etc is of such impact it is absolutely true that many saw the kneejerk reduction as likely to have at best a very low or as Olivia's analysis suggests a failure to impact at all.

The wowsers who see a reduction of a BAC as an easy "seen to be doing something" will not be dismayed at what Olivia has shown as it was all about the action taken at the height of the season for that limit to be in the news. Now in the depth of winter when so many other risk factors are patently obvious in their impact on serious crashes causing death, those wowsers are forced to look elsewhere for their headlines and that is a bigger challenge and so much more difficult to get traction for any one of them.

Howie said...

"The impairment of a driver in the range of BAC between the old limit and the reduced one as of last December is so potentially flawed due to body mass..."

ROFL. You really don't have a clue do you guy?

"Now in the depth of winter when so many other risk factors are patently obvious in their impact on serious crashes causing death..."

Yeah, we should just chuck alcohol consumption into the mix then eh? As I say, utterly clueless.