Should have used a bike but it was blowing a hooley and I jumped into the car for a 3/4 mile round trip.

I wouldn't have even considered driving it, even if I'd not had a drink. What's that, 750 yards/metres in each direction? It'd take me longer to get the car out of the garage and put it away again than to walk it, not to mention the condensation such a short journey would put into the engine and exhaust.

The current trend to reduce the alcohol content of drinks combined with pub prices is enough to put anyone off. I enjoy a pint of bitter with a steak but only one if driving. Breathing will be outlawed next! Summers here and car windows open and the number of people smoking weed while driving must be a bigger problem.

My personal point of view is a limit of zero. I have too often seen the consequences of alcohol induced accidents amongst friends, including one who was unhurt, but arrested, fined, 12 points and his pride and joy, on the never never had the insurance company refuse to cough up 20 odd thousand quid for hutefis damage, but paid the 3rd party claim.

Rule for when we (rarely) go out for a meal.

Designated driver gets alcohol free drinks paid for by others.

If just me and YRG, she doesn't drink so no problem if just two of us.

Edited by _ORB_ on 07/07/2023 at 11:04

I'm in agreement with those wh think that the rest of europe has it right.

Mind you, the police could have a field day if they just sit in traffic these days. The smell of weed is rife.

A couple of things to be careful of is alcohol in food and medicines (such as some cough syrups and cold 'remedies'), which could make you fall foul of any new 'zero limit' laws.

When I was working on the railways, they had a strict policy on alcohol, none to be imbibed for 10hrs before a shift (or entering any work building / site), you even got the sack (on the spot - escorted from the building immediately) for bringing alcohol onto work property even when not 'working', as more than one colleague found out the hard way after doing some Christmas shopping.

I presume that the 10hrs rule was a minimum time for certain high risk individuals who couldn't process alcohol so quickly (possibly shorter, slimmer people as well as those not 'used' to drinking alcohol).

Ditto for companies I worked in (mainly US).

A couple of things to be careful of is alcohol in food and medicines (such as some cough syrups and cold 'remedies'), which could make you fall foul of any new 'zero limit' laws.

The zero limit, ie that used in aviation is, IIRC, 20mg in breath. Setting at the level avoids false positives from this, that and the other. Some cold remedies are said to contain absolute alcohol at a similar proportion to Sherry.

When I was working on the railways, they had a strict policy on alcohol, none to be imbibed for 10hrs before a shift (or entering any work building / site), you even got the sack (on the spot - escorted from the building immediately) for bringing alcohol onto work property even when not 'working', as more than one colleague found out the hard way after doing some Christmas shopping.

Ouch!. Rules I guess is rules but in a sealed container and with a purchase receipt to hand it seems unduly harsh.

I presume that the 10hrs rule was a minimum time for certain high risk individuals who couldn't process alcohol so quickly (possibly shorter, slimmer people as well as those not 'used' to drinking alcohol).

AIUI people who are 'used' to drinking metabolise alcohol at no greater rate than a teetotaller. Indeed, if they've (ab)used the stuff over an extended period of time liver damage may slow how quickly it's broken down.

As a few others have said, I support zero.

One point of contention is that an arbitrary line at any mg/litre figure will affect some people more than others, just like the 17 or 18-years age for a driving licence. And we all know that having a drink with a meal - rather than just social drinking - retards the absorption of alcohol into the bloodstream. So a glass of wine with a meal should not put anyone over the limit, except zero I suppose.

As with so many things, Europe in general and France in particular have got this right. The UK limit of 80mg/100ml in a blood sample is foolishly generous.

In France, a leisurely evening out for two sharing a bottle of wine has been de riguer for decades. That's three glasses each, or perhaps slightly less for the driver and slightly more for the passenger. The first is treated as an aperitif and is mostly consumed on a fairly empty stomach while choosing, ordering and awaiting their meal. The second and third accompanies the rest of the meal, which would usually last well over an hour, by which time the alcohol in the first glass will have mostly been metabolised. Then there will be a leisurely coffee and conversation. By the time M. et Mme. are strolling to la voiture, probably at least two hours after their arrival, they would be most unlikely to breach the 50mg limit, unless they were 5ft tall with a BMI of 18. Alcohol is distributed uniformly throughout the body, so for a 17stone Brit with a BMI in or beyond the yellow section of the NHS obesity chart, it would probably hardly register........assuming an alcohol free 12hrs beforehand. Anyone caught breaching our limit probably has an unhealthy alcohol problem.

Edited by John F on 07/07/2023 at 12:08

Britain and drink. Reckon using a mobile phone or looking at the touch screen is just as dangerous and there is no breathalyser for those.

Indeed, and you could easily add people doing other stuff whilst driving, such as women putting on make-up, and people easting and drinking - the proverbial hot cup of coffee jammed in the crotch area is a real doozy for safety.

I also recall HJ himself having a big rant in his Telegraph coloumn about 'people deliberately setting something on fire' and holding it in their mouth whilst driving (i.e. smoking).

All these presumably would come under the 'due care and attention', reckless / dangerous driving parts of the highway laws. You have to wonder why specific offences of using a mobile phone etc is really needed, as surely these other ones should cover it, given attention and driving ability is compromised sufficiently to present a hazard.