We are now firmly in the season of office Christmas parties. Consequently, people are more likely to have a drink on a 'work night' and drive into work or elsewhere the following day.

The seasonal drink driving ads are upon us and this can only be a good thing. Driving whilst drunk is simply idiotic. But where (or when) do you think the enforcement of this campaign will take place?

Does anyone think there is something massively ingenuous about breathalysing motorists on the morning commute?

The latest breathalysing equipment used by the plod might not discriminate between night and day, but anyone with half a brain can tell you that there is a significant difference between being under the influence of alcohol on a night out and driving into work with a hangover the following day.

Should the police focus their resources on the 10pm-4am offenders? Are early morning stops unfair on normally law-abiding folk who, realistically, are not under the [iinfluence[/i of alcohol?

I'm not necessarily picking sides, but I know which one I am leaning towards.

If there is alcohol in your blood then it affects your driving, it doesn't matter when you drank it.

If that's the case, why do the police round up morning motorists en masse in order to pick out a few silly ones, whilst night-time offenders are simply identified by bad driving?

They don't, they should do mind.
Anyone who drives while under the influence of alcohol or drugs is an idiot who deserves to be relegated to a pedestrian permanently.

Surely you've seen the traps laid by police on Saturday and Sunday mornings? They pull in 7 cars a time.

I agree that anyone who drives under the influence is an idiot, but are morning-after drivers under the influence? I'm not convinced. Their blood alcohol level might be over but everyone knows that any impairment is drastically reduced. The police know this too, but pulling over hungover drivers is much easier than chasing 80mph drunks after last orders.

I wish they'd stop me, I've been dying to use my line, have cultivated it for years now - when they ask "When did you last have an alcoholic drink sir" I want to see the look on their face when I say "About ten years ago officer, how good is your breathalyser ?"

To answer your question though, its not just the affect that alcohol has on your judgement shortly after you've consumed it, but the affect it has on your judgement several hours later when you've got the hangover, if you've got a splitting headache and a rough stomach then you won't be concentrating on the road and pavements, road users and pedestrians - thats the problem.

Although quite how reducing police numbers is going to improve the situation is another question.

Don't quite get what the original poster is carping about - A drink driver is a drink driver, whatever time of day he is caught.

To be fair, hauling them in for a test during rush hour is actually the best time to be doing it, because a drink related accident is going to be a lot more nasty at that time, than in the middle of the night.....Also, anything that might discourage folk from driving hungover during rush hour, can only be a good thing.

Don't the police have to have 'reasonable suspicion' to breath test people?

If so, what is the legal basis for pulling over several cars at random and asking the drivers for samples of breath?

Is this the same sort of power where they can stop and search at random if they suspect a high chance of violence in an area, for example at a major sporting event?

What sort of idiot drives to work hungover? Isn't it obvious your reactions would be impaired.

The use of the word 'plod' shows your attitude vividly enough.
Most people know what the rules are and can take steps to avoid unwanted consequences.
The police are not the problem and how they target drink drivers within the law is their concern and good luck to them.
On a separate point, drink driving is not illegal (it may be unwise) unless one is over the limit. Some people seem to think that all drink drivers are criminals. Technically some are not.

Nope, not in 27 years of driving, three as a white van man. I've seen and been pulled on tax checks, insurance crack downs, duff lights, VOSA diesel checks and a few other bits, but I've never seen an indiscriminate pulling of drivers to breath check them.

I got pulled at 7.40 this evening for doing 30 in a 40 as I was looking for a junction, breath test and the once over for the car.

No complaints, but using 'driving too slow' as an excuse is a bit iffy.


I've always wondered why they don't pull people leaving scooter and bike rallies, there must be a lot of people over the limits leaving them.

I used to work in the printing industry and our Christmas parties were always Friday or Saturday nights when the lads on shop floor didn't have to go in and operate machinery the next day. (Think they had to leave at least 6 or 7 hours between drinking and using the machines). I know its not always practical but if work parties were on a weekend then the majority wouldn't have the problem of going to work the next day.

And I'm the same as Jerry Chicken, not allowed alcohol on my drugs so I'm always the designated driver which I don't mind as I'd rather we all get home safetly.

To be fair to Kirkstaller, I've seen and been stopped by police doing random checks. It happens a couple of times a year near where I live.
I'm a bit torn on this to be honest, it's obviously not good to be driving if you're still over the limit (though I'm not sure how you would tell the difference between feeling a bit rough and being over the limit) but I'd rather the police put more effort into catching those who are well over the limit and much more dangerous the night before than those who are just a bit rough the next morning. I'm also not too keen on the principle of the police stopping you at random "just in case" you might be committing a crime.
I'm not saying I'm totally against it, just am concerned about it becoming the thin end of the wedge.

At a previous address one of my neighbours was a motorbike copper and he told me that they target morning drivers as there are too many that drive after a night on the pi$$ (even though the majority would have not driven the night before and got a taxi or a lift). Although this sounds a sneaky and cynical way to catch people out, if there is a risk then it's something that needs doing.

What are the stats on accidents and casualties caused by morning-after drink-drivers?

I am sure they will be arriving shortly

That would be promotion. Not a 'relegation'.

A breathalyser doesn't detect hangovers, it detects alcohol.

Nope. Not in 30+ years of being a driver, the last 20 years of which as a part of my employment taking me all over the country.

In any case, the solution is simple. Don't drive a car if you're over the limit. If you do, don't whine about being nicked.

Time of day or hangover has no (legal) impact on driving, if you go out, have a skinfull, get a cab home, good for you. If then head off to work the next morning and get pulled over and are found out to be over the limit, hard luck.

You could argue that if you get hangovers like I tend to get then you'd not be in the best state to drive anyway irrespective of any alcohol limit laws.

If there's alcohol in your blood stream then it has an effect on reactions.

Generally alcohol leaves the body at a rate of 1 unit per hour, however, this can vary depending on age, weight, Bmi, other liquids consumed and also types of food eaten.

Disposable self testing kits are available at most Halfords stores and online, and although they won't do you any favours in a court of law are actually pretty reliable. Businesses that random test their staff sometimes use the disposable breathalysers before calling a tester out for something more concrete.

Last Sunday afternoon, I was driving home from Winterslow, Wiltshire. It was about 4.00pm and starting to get dark. Just prior to joining the A30 to Salisbury an idiot in a Fiat Seicento overtook me on a blind bend, then slowed down to less than the speed I'd previously been travelling at. I followed this 2@ for a couple of miles, watching as he wandered between kerb and crossing the central white line before I phoned the old bill. I kept up a running commentary for them until he parked his motor outside of a boozer just off the Salisbury ring road.

Do I feel guilty about dobbing him in? Do I fook! On one of his little trips across the central white line, it could've been me or someone I knew coming the other way. He may not have been over the limit, he could've been just a sh[ii[/ite driver. Either way, he shouldn't have been on the road.

The days have long gone when the drink-driver's danger time was after 10.30pm. Plod aren't that stupid, they know that anyone could be over the limit at any time of day

I am surprised you did not get a £60 fine for using your Moby although i guess you were hands free.