Unless you can answer the question you pose above (how many products etc) you are just spouting unfounded theories.not worth your time to type, or ours to read.
phalanax,
May 12, 1:23am
lowering the bac from 100 to 20 makes sensebut to zero its gonna be a hard road for some.why do adults throw the weirdo punishment at there young.when they themselves would have none of it.
phalanax,
May 12, 1:36am
heck some things are givens.its a given for instance that lots of young folk will be subject to a law that is fundamentally flawed.they are old enough to drink in a bar but unlike there elders.they will be stung.for doing the same thing.worsen yet they may be stung for doing nothing wrong but driving the next day after a few beers the night before.zero is flawed
hutchk,
May 12, 2:03am
I'm closer to 40 than 20 and I don't wear perfume. I should be OK.
hutchk,
May 12, 2:12am
This has nothing to do with Jaguar being superior in every way to BMW, please stay on topic.
phalanax,
May 12, 2:19am
Arent the Bavarians big bier drinkers anyway.lol.Maybe thats why they cant get the headlinings to stay put in their beemers.its just too much .nobody looks at the roof.lol
elect70,
May 12, 2:33am
All the housewives wont beable to have a wine with lunch with their freinds ,or take cough medicine & or eatliquer chocolatesbefore driving ,old man wont be able to drop into pub for pint on way home, if itszero for allcrazy .
pollymay,
May 12, 2:41am
Stupid stupid stupid like most people in this country. Some people can't handle beer, some can. If you are stonckered after a couple don't drive! If you can have a couple and barely notice it is fine, if you can have lots and still feel fine don't drive cause at that point you KNOW you are over limit and impaired just don't realise.
Zero tolerance will not work, you could have a very low reading from the night before and be off to jail, you could consume food eating out drizzled in brandy and be over and countless other scenarios. The current limit is for those that don't have any goddamn sense to know they shouldn't be driving, people like my mum who thought after 2 bottles of wine you just drove home. She landed up stealing and crashing my first car into a van load of people, there is a HUGE difference between that and someone that has a beer then has to rush home for the kids or something. I don't know what they are getting at, sure IF they would solely use it to catch those that wander the road after having one cause as of now they can't but they go after everyone to fill the bank and their statistics so they can F--- off
Y
zoltec45,
May 12, 2:44am
Zero tolerance will not work! How does it work in Japan then! its pretty easy, if you drink you dont drive. done
thejazzpianoma,
May 12, 3:21am
I totally agree, its just another stupid measure to try and keep the fine revenue at current levels.
Reducing to a zero tolerance does nothing but catch good law abiding people out on stupid technicalities. What infuriates me is the brainless sheep in this country seem so content to let the Police get away with stupidity like this that only takes away focus from real crime and people who are being properly dangerous on the roads.
It dosn't take a rocket scientist to realise people are going to be needlessly dragged over the coals because they had a couple of beers the night before or ate something with alcohol in it.
Its time we demanded the Police actually show some proper scientific justification for stupid brain dead schemes like this. For goodness sake, how many people are going to be flagged through a check point who are properly intoxicated while the police are busy prosecuting some poor bugger who has accidentally got a tiny bit of alcohol still in their system.
thejazzpianoma,
May 12, 3:27am
This is just the sort of stupid conclusion they want you to jump to. Its like the 5km/h tolerance for speeding.
Having a zero tolerance will not stop drunk drivers any more than a sensible low tolerance. All it does is waste police resources and incriminate those who pose no extra risk to other drivers.
Same with the 5km/h limit it sounds really great to have a "crack down" to all those who can't think for themselves but in reality it does nothing for road safety and just makes life harder for those caught on a technicality.
pollymay,
May 12, 3:28am
This isn't Japan, we don't have good public transport, we are very rural. If you like Japan go there. Although we should look to other nations for guidance we are not them, what works elsewhere may not work here. We are our own culture. If the whole world had the same rules people would almost never migrate to follow their interests around the world.
smac,
May 12, 3:38am
All this talk of zero tolerance means all the skims readers here will now think it's actually been proposed for >20.hell they wouldn't change .08 to .05 they're sure not gonna make it 0.
pollymay,
May 12, 3:47am
I did skim read actually lol. But as it stands the system works it just doesn't work when people sneak under the radar, you can't force tolerance on someone that doesn't get pulled up.
kevin_the_kiwi,
May 12, 4:40am
Unfortunately a reduced limit doesn't mean a reduced crash rate. The United States with an 80 limit has one of the highest crash rates in the developed world, but Britain, also with an 80 limit, has one of the lowest. The proportion of road fatalities with alcohol as a contributing factor in New Zealand is 27%, but, despite a 50 BAC and lower overall crash rates, Australia's is 31%.
we have these laws because people cannot be trusted to do the right thing
the worst abusers dont care in the slightest - they are going to drive regardlessof what the law says
sweden hasa zero tolerance policy - any breath alcohol & your off to jail . on the spot
johnf_456,
May 12, 6:06am
Yup regardless of what law exists repeat drunk drivers will still do it, they can't be taught.
loonee-dial-111,
May 12, 8:44am
Exactly.
julian.walls,
May 12, 12:04pm
I thinks its on the cards the Zero Limit is coming. There are lots of hardened police officers whom have witnessed some pretty heavy crashes concerning drunken drivers and want a zero rating. I met quite a few of them over the years. Finland after all has has a Zero tolerance for 20 years plus.
How Accurate are they!
Breathalysers are generally pretty goodif they have been regularly maintained and calibrated and the calibration fluid has not lost its kick in terms of life span and storage in a cool place. (we used a gas and Police used a spray)
In another life (over 10 years ago now.i am no longer in it company long since would up)I and 5 others vendered and sold coin operated Breathalysers in around 25 pubs scattered Wellington, ChCH, and Auckland I believe our machines in many cases were more accurate at that timethen the police ones -(they took the lowest quote for theirs)We calibrated ours regularly once a month to 10% degree of error and generally they were 99.9% accurate. There were a few bugs with then initially which were ironed out - Coins getting stuck, Pub manager theft! (that was fixed by a massive alarm);we got more scientific about placement - if too close to outside sea enviroment (Cave Rock in Sumner was a problem.we had to move machine out of the foyer into the pub itself)or Microwave it could effect readings by another 10%
Our machines were built in Australia and designed to meet Australian Standards (There was no NZ Standard at the time) they carried the Australian Standard S Mark. From my understanding in NSW every pub, every bottle store or shop that sells alcohol must have a Breathalyser!'- A Lot of drunken drivers would be removed from the road if a Government had the guts to implement and we would not need a zero level.We had hoped armed forces would take them as overseas Barracks often have a Breathalyser in their Mess and we negioated 3-5 years but alas was a victim of Defence spending cuts.
Sure there always going to be the heavy drinker and they should be locked up 5-10 years to really dry out unlike 2-3 years and out in 1 for good behaviour that we have now!
xacoon,
May 12, 7:11pm
the repeat offenders that someone mentioned previously arent going to give a shit, theyre over the limit now so what difference will it make! if you are going to play zero tolerance policy you are going to have to crack down on all other forms of drugs too, otherwise you are going to end up with a heap of stoned drivers instead of someone whos had one beer before driving "oh but a cone or 2 makes me a better driver" bollocks. its a form of intoxication too. the only reason it doeasnt appear in the stats is that its not tested for.
clanky,
May 12, 7:26pm
Where I work there is a zero limit. 0.005 and you are sacked. We don't have access to alcohol, so it isn't really a problem, but Listerine will give a false positive, but only on a BAC test, and it's usually clear after about 20 minutes. We also undergo random, unannounced drug and alcohol testing, but you don't breathe for that one.; The Lion intoximeters we use are generally accurate as they have a self test mode before use to zero them. Not a problem if you don't drink, but a bigger deterrent to teh hoons would be compulsory insurance with the insurance companies deciding the premium, based on age, experience etc. Don't forget, restricted and learner drivers start at all ages.
klrider,
May 12, 7:41pm
And whe they are out there there is another group moaning about that as well.
elect70,
May 13, 2:12am
Oh well may as well have a couple jugs at the pub instead of a pint , seeing as how it would be illegal anyway.At Least the poms have littlepubs within walking distance , whereas NZ we tend to have big booze barns or little boutique bars in CBDfor the in crowd .They no answer for the road toll just more of the same BS
gedo1,
May 13, 4:07am
C;mon Jazz.You're clearly an intelligent and learned person and you know better than that.It is not the Police that bring in these laws. It is the politicians in response to their constituents and the wish to retain their seats.The Police (god bless their souls!) then have to carry out the enforcement of the enacted laws.Not saying I disagree with a zero tolerance after all I have seen about the effect alcohol has on the roads and the sad court cases that arise."But I only had a couple officer (your honour; Sir, whatever)!"
hotrodtodd1,
May 13, 4:14am
Its do-able, but probably not until every politician has a taxpayer funded driver to get them home.
Its simple really - if you drink, then dont drive, and if you drive, then dont drink.
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.