We’re doing some checking into this move to zero blood alcohol for Queensland riders, but in the meantime here is a letter sent by one of our readers to the Queensland Minister for Transport in response to the call for tenders to “research” this “innovative” move.
Read it, and get stuck into writing something similar if you value your freedom!
The Minister for Transport.
Good morning, Ms Nolan.
I write with regard to tender document RSSM 0610: To investigate the lowering or complete zeroing of BAC ( Blood Alcohol Content ) for motorcyclists. I have to ask why.
Are m/cyclists more likely than the general motoring public to operate while intoxicated ? I've looked at what data I can find on line and yes, riders are over-represented for crashes on a percentage basis compared to drivers but I see nothing to indicate that we - I'm a rider and have been for 40 years - are more likely to operate drunk. I think you'd find " don't drink and ride " stronger among bikers than the equivalent would be among motorists.
Please consider that when we crash we almost always only kill or maim ourselves and the very rare pillion. When drivers meet the same fate they can have a vehicle full to over-flowing with passengers - two examples of car-loads of young people in major crashes recently come to mind. While on that point why not bring in a law that there should be no more than 2 people under the age of 25 in a vehicle at any one time ? Think how many lives and how much heart-ache that would save. When we crash it is usually into something fixed - trees, power-poles, barriers, etc, and when we crash with cars the responsibility is often shared. In any case the driver walks away. We don't take out groups or even single pedestrians. So why are we being targetted ?
I offer this for your reflection: I'm 65, semi-retired. I own a large touring motor-cycle. When my wife and I go out on the bike, which we do as often as we can, we like to stop for lunch at a country pub. She has a soft-drink, I get a pot of Gold. We loosen or remove our riding gear, relax, have our meal, then either talk to locals or walk around the town before getting back on the bike. Find me a problem in that. If this investigation were to turn into a law I would be sitting there nursing a soft-drink while watching a motorist load his wife and kids ( up to a total of 8 people in some cases ) into 2 tonnes of 4WD and then drive off with a BAC of up to .049. Do you not find something odd or droll in that comparison ? It also means that if I were to persist with my harmless activity of having a single beer, after legislation I would become a criminal. THAT MAKES ME EXTREMELY BLOODY ANGRY ! IF SAID 4WD DRIVER IS CONSIDERED SOBER ENOUGH TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR UP TO 8 OTHER PEOPLE THEN WHY AREN'T I CONSIDERED SOBER ENOUGH TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR A MAXIMUM OF 2 ? I'm not apologising for the upper case - I'm ropable and I need you to know it. I loathe discrimination and I equally loathe being patronized. And for God's sake don't give me that line about " If it only saves one life. . . .". If that was a working philosophy there are dozens of ideas you could legislate into practice and damn well you know it ! I have to say that the whole idea reeks of political expediency.
I'll finish with the following : If the Executive wants to go down this legislative path then let them have the courage to make it zero BAC for ALL road users. One in, all in and damn the electoral consequences, eh ? Truck drivers already have to be at zero and at first sight that seems fine: Being in charge of 60 to 70 tonnes of machinery means that of course the driver should be dry. His operation can have a devastating effect on others; but so can a car driver's and there's a lot more of them. Of course, we know that it wouldn't stop intoxicated riding or driving any more than the present legislation does. Law-abiding people obey the law, the others don't. It'll just makes more work for the police and the judiciary ( and the bloody lawyers). Think of all the challenges when drivers or riders are booked and found to have taken no more than medicine. Will you also legislate to ensure that the alcohol content of such pharmaceuticals is shown prominently on the label ? Will we have an on-going public awareness campaign to warn of the dangers of alcoholic medicines ? I'm sure the greater population knows and accepts that you can't legislate for stupidity so please don't inflict ineffectual restrictions on other-wise law-abiding people by trying to do the impossible.
I will post this today. After 7 calendar days I will be sending copies of it, with only variation being suitable form of address to the Editors of all Qld papers, the Brisbane Times on-line, to each State Parliamentarian and into any pertinent, on-line discussion forum that I find.
Thank-you very much for your time. I wish you well. Sincerely,
Ross Halpin
What do you think about this business?
Peter “The Bear” Thoeming
More
Comments
I find the whole issue to be a political beat-up. I think it is ridiculous that the ones that are currently taking responsibility for themselves (staying under .05)are to be punished because the Government decides to take on a minority rather than address the real issues.
Drivers and riders who are caught "hooning" can have their vehicles confiscated and, depending on the State, crushed. There is no such penalty for a motorist that is an habitual drink driver. I, for one, would welcome legislation that punished someone who had been caught over the legal limit more than 3 times by getting their vehicle off the road. It is obvious in such a case that the motorist is incapable of learning safe behavior by the existing laws. The same people are sometimes caught driving drunk again, in the same vehicle, while under suspension. This, of course, could not occur if the vehicle had been confiscated.
By all means get tough on recidivists no matter what vehicle they operate, but stop turning responsible, law abiding citizens into criminals.
David
As David notes, it is not uncommon for drivers banned for DUI to be caught again and again, often in the same vehicle. There was one here in Adelaide a few months ago, nicked in the morning a couple of times over the limit, and already banned for DUI. The same copper got him again a few hour later on the same road, but even higher over the limit. You CAN"T legislate against this type of person.
Prison with a compulsory attendance at AA meetings program might help.The problem would be stopping them falling off the wagon again.
Ewan
http://australianmotorcycletouring.wordpress.com/2010/07/12/qld-0-bac/