There are many great things about the Christmas holidays. However, one of the downsides is the rising number of people who drink and drive on the UK’s roads. Statistics show there is always an increase in convictions at this time of the year, with some areas worse than others. Now local police forces are using a range of tactics to try and tackle the problem. PetrolPrices takes a look at the worst affected areas.
The drink driving problem
According to comparison site Money Supermarket, which assessed some seven million insurance quotes running through its system, some locations around the country have a higher rate of offenders with drink and drug driving convictions than others.
Currently sitting at the top of the list is Sunderland, in the Northeast. Almost three in every 1,000 drivers have a drink and/or drug driving conviction on their licence. Worryingly, that’s an increase of 1.3% compared to the previous 12 months. Second on the list is Truro in Cornwall, with 2.6 drivers per 1,000, then Coventry with 2.53 offenders per 1,000 drivers.
Crewe topped the charts last year, but has fallen to sixth place this year – despite the actual number of drink and drug driving convictions rising from 1.69 to 2.29 drivers per 1,000. At the other end of the scale is London. However, this is simply due to do with the high levels of public transport use rather than any kind of innovative drink driving solution. London just has more travel options than other cities, meaning that those who’ve had one too many can get home safely without getting behind the wheel.
Demographic details
Interestingly, the study also looked at demographic information such as age group and occupation. It found the highest rate of convictions was within the 25-29 age group, followed by those in the 30-39 age group. The 25-29 age group saw a big jump in offenders over the course of the year, from 2.32 drivers per 1,000 in 2015-16, to 3.32 per 1,000 in 2016-17.
Both genders have seen an increase in the rate of convictions, although men are still more likely to be caught over the legal limit. Regarding occupation, mature students living at home were considerably more likely to be found drink driving than any other demographic, at a rate of 28.5 per 1,000. Mature students living away from home took second place, at 16.5 per 1,000, while in third place were the UK’s scaffolders, at a much lower rate of 4.5 per 1,000 drivers.
Increasing the limit
The current limit for drink driving was instituted 50 years ago under the Road Safety Act of 1967. Back then, the number of cars on the road was significantly lower, and the limit was set based on the resulting road conditions, along with a range of other factors.
Many have called for a change to this in recent years, with six out of ten drivers saying a shift from 80mg per 100ml of blood is due. Some even want a much stricter level of just 20mg per 100ml. Scotland has already changed its limit, with a new 50mg per 100ml restriction put in place in 2014.
The Christmas factor
Despite efforts to publicise the problem, there is still a rise in cases around the festive period, as more people take a chance after a night out. The Christmas/New Year Drink Drive Campaign started on 1 December will see the National Police Chiefs’ Council and the Traffic Information System Police (TISPOL) working together to try and combat the problem.
Approaches include using intelligence-led tactics, as well as knowledge from local officers about hotspots to find people who are over the limit. There will also be sharing of social media campaigns by different police forces, the government and charities, to remind people of the dangers.
Last year’s Christmas operation saw 103,085 drivers stopped, with nearly 5,700 tests administered that were either positive, failed or refused. Drivers who drink and/or use drugs before they drive are 23 times more likely to be involved in a fatal accident. Alcohol is the single most significant impairment to drivers, according to a study by the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety in March 2016.
The message remains simple – don’t drink and drive. It just isn’t worth it.
Do you think the legal drink drive limit should be reduced? Is a limit set half a century ago still relevant to our roads today? Air your views by leaving a comment below.
No it should not be reduced. Driver training and vehicle primary and secondary safety is far far better than 50yrs ago
vehicle primary and secondary safety is far far better than 50yrs ago
And this of course helps the pedestrian that gest hit by a car?
Actually Dave, without in any way condoning drink driving, yes it does. The front of my first car (Austin A35 van, vintage 1959) had thin steel bumpers, metal over-riders, a vertical metal bar radiator grille, two fog lamps with plain glass lenses, a metal Austin badge mounted sharp edge forward, external welded seams, and a starting handle sticking through the bumper. It had enough ground clearance that any pedestrian would go under, where it had lots of knobbly steering joints and so on ready to mince them.
It was just as lethal inside: no seat belts, no airbags, sharp edges everywhere, no rigid body shell, plain glass in the side windows, skinny non-collapsible steering column.
Also terrible visibility, useless wipers, awful lights, trafficators, no demist on windscreen or rear, no door mirrors, drum brakes, japanese town-and-country tyres, slack in the steering box, and ineffective shocks.
All perfectly legal! I remember when the MOT was a voluntary “Ten-Year Test” too.
If you learn to drive in that junk and stay out of trouble, then you do not get that sense of invulnerability that young drivers have now. I got 50 years with no-claim for accidents (I had two claims for cars stolen).
My Volvo V70 has no external protrusions, front is all deformable plastic, has a lower bonnet and an air dam to keep pedestrians from crushing injuries. And it has good visibility, radials, disks, ABS, rack and pinion, and a bunch of other things that helps not hit anything in the first place.
Nobody wants to hit anybody, but if it happens, things are about three times better than they used to be. Whether that just means drunk pedestrians are more careless about strolling around in the road in the dark is another matter.
But drinks are stronger, roads are busier, risks higher, and drivers still have the same mindset.
I believe there should be zero tolerance in regard to drink and drug driving. Many seem to think drink or drugs will not affect them, that they’re immune, but it does affect them. They may not feel impaired, but getting behind the wheel after drinking or taking drugs is totally stupid. If the drink/drug driver were to hit a car, killing the mother and father, including the children and their pet, who are on their way to their grandparents with presents and the happiness of spending Christmas with them, what would be the fall out? Think about it! How could anyone who commits that sin live with themselves, they’ve destroyed a family through stupidity. Sadly, it happens, therefore, the law should be that no one who drinks or takes drugs gets behind the wheel of any vehicle – ever.
Zero tolerance would only work in a perfect world. Do people realise that many mouth washes contain alcohol which may be detected if someone is tested soon after yet presently they are just above zero. Some people actually have the ability to self produce alcohol, which surprised me when I first heard about it. I would think each of the latter vary but nevertheless, they may easily be over a zero limit despite not drinking.
I take morphine daily and it does worry me that it may affect my driving though I’m not aware of it. Consequently, I drive as little as possible.
Id be happier if they imposed the same punishments for drink driving to those caught on their mobiles. Drunk drivers (generally) are more cautious and it is proven those on phones are totally unaware of anything going on around them
Ban them when caught for life if caught driving while banned jail them for life and make pay for all the costs of keeping them in jail Hit offenders hard the soft action of today does not work to stop people offending
They should have a policeman outside every licensed premises with a breathalyzer that’s the only way to stop it.
With today’s in-car, “onboard” technology, why has no car manufacturer included an automatic toximeter? Fitted just above the dashboard, it could then be linked-in to the car’s self-checking system; when the ignition is switched on, the toximeter could then automatically test the driver’s breath and, if alcohol or drugs are detected – automatically disable the car from starting. Seems simple enough…
Agree. But cannot see manufacturers doing that – they want to sell cars!
So, the simple act of moving your car on your own property should not be allowed?
Now thousands of people have been prosecuted for the ‘dangerous’ act of drug driving, so why has there been no substantial drop in the accident rates to match those prosecuted?
Perhaps just an easy’ tick’ box for the police, rather than checking for the real cause of the accident?
I personally think that it should be zero tollerance to drink/drug driving, because of people whome have suffered the loss of loved ones. ( My heart bleeds for them) but until tney change the law (which I think they should) I will continue to drive having had 2 pints until the law changes.
Policy should be driven by evidence, not sentiment. How many accidents per year are actually caused by drivers between 50 and 80 mg/100ml? How many casualties result?
Drinking and driving is a choice- one that no one should make. So it follows that those that do should be punished, especially if they have caused harm or worse to other people. But what of the bigger picture? Have you heard the quip that drunken drivers are only involved in 10% of accidents. So if we ban sober drivers we could cut accidents by 90%. Not a sensible idea, but my point is that we all need to take driving much more seriously and concentrate on the driving 100%. No mobile phone, no videoing everyone having a great sing song. Let the driver just drive, after all he/she is in charge of a lethal weapon and the sooner we treat a car (or truck or motorcycle) like that the safer we will all be. And start with better education for all, maybe some kind of mandatory advanced test within 2 years of your initial test, and a licence that expires with a re-test every couple of years to keep people on their toes.
Have a great Christmas and drive safely out there.
No it should not be reduced. Driver training and vehicle primary and secondary safety is far far better than 50yrs ago
vehicle primary and secondary safety is far far better than 50yrs ago
And this of course helps the pedestrian that gest hit by a car?
Actually Dave, without in any way condoning drink driving, yes it does. The front of my first car (Austin A35 van, vintage 1959) had thin steel bumpers, metal over-riders, a vertical metal bar radiator grille, two fog lamps with plain glass lenses, a metal Austin badge mounted sharp edge forward, external welded seams, and a starting handle sticking through the bumper. It had enough ground clearance that any pedestrian would go under, where it had lots of knobbly steering joints and so on ready to mince them.
It was just as lethal inside: no seat belts, no airbags, sharp edges everywhere, no rigid body shell, plain glass in the side windows, skinny non-collapsible steering column.
Also terrible visibility, useless wipers, awful lights, trafficators, no demist on windscreen or rear, no door mirrors, drum brakes, japanese town-and-country tyres, slack in the steering box, and ineffective shocks.
All perfectly legal! I remember when the MOT was a voluntary “Ten-Year Test” too.
If you learn to drive in that junk and stay out of trouble, then you do not get that sense of invulnerability that young drivers have now. I got 50 years with no-claim for accidents (I had two claims for cars stolen).
My Volvo V70 has no external protrusions, front is all deformable plastic, has a lower bonnet and an air dam to keep pedestrians from crushing injuries. And it has good visibility, radials, disks, ABS, rack and pinion, and a bunch of other things that helps not hit anything in the first place.
Nobody wants to hit anybody, but if it happens, things are about three times better than they used to be. Whether that just means drunk pedestrians are more careless about strolling around in the road in the dark is another matter.
But drinks are stronger, roads are busier, risks higher, and drivers still have the same mindset.
I believe there should be zero tolerance in regard to drink and drug driving. Many seem to think drink or drugs will not affect them, that they’re immune, but it does affect them. They may not feel impaired, but getting behind the wheel after drinking or taking drugs is totally stupid. If the drink/drug driver were to hit a car, killing the mother and father, including the children and their pet, who are on their way to their grandparents with presents and the happiness of spending Christmas with them, what would be the fall out? Think about it! How could anyone who commits that sin live with themselves, they’ve destroyed a family through stupidity. Sadly, it happens, therefore, the law should be that no one who drinks or takes drugs gets behind the wheel of any vehicle – ever.
Zero tolerance would only work in a perfect world. Do people realise that many mouth washes contain alcohol which may be detected if someone is tested soon after yet presently they are just above zero. Some people actually have the ability to self produce alcohol, which surprised me when I first heard about it. I would think each of the latter vary but nevertheless, they may easily be over a zero limit despite not drinking.
I take morphine daily and it does worry me that it may affect my driving though I’m not aware of it. Consequently, I drive as little as possible.
Id be happier if they imposed the same punishments for drink driving to those caught on their mobiles. Drunk drivers (generally) are more cautious and it is proven those on phones are totally unaware of anything going on around them
Ban them when caught for life if caught driving while banned jail them for life and make pay for all the costs of keeping them in jail Hit offenders hard the soft action of today does not work to stop people offending
They should have a policeman outside every licensed premises with a breathalyzer that’s the only way to stop it.
With today’s in-car, “onboard” technology, why has no car manufacturer included an automatic toximeter? Fitted just above the dashboard, it could then be linked-in to the car’s self-checking system; when the ignition is switched on, the toximeter could then automatically test the driver’s breath and, if alcohol or drugs are detected – automatically disable the car from starting. Seems simple enough…
Agree. But cannot see manufacturers doing that – they want to sell cars!
So, the simple act of moving your car on your own property should not be allowed?
Now thousands of people have been prosecuted for the ‘dangerous’ act of drug driving, so why has there been no substantial drop in the accident rates to match those prosecuted?
Perhaps just an easy’ tick’ box for the police, rather than checking for the real cause of the accident?
I personally think that it should be zero tollerance to drink/drug driving, because of people whome have suffered the loss of loved ones. ( My heart bleeds for them) but until tney change the law (which I think they should) I will continue to drive having had 2 pints until the law changes.
Policy should be driven by evidence, not sentiment. How many accidents per year are actually caused by drivers between 50 and 80 mg/100ml? How many casualties result?
Drinking and driving is a choice- one that no one should make. So it follows that those that do should be punished, especially if they have caused harm or worse to other people. But what of the bigger picture? Have you heard the quip that drunken drivers are only involved in 10% of accidents. So if we ban sober drivers we could cut accidents by 90%. Not a sensible idea, but my point is that we all need to take driving much more seriously and concentrate on the driving 100%. No mobile phone, no videoing everyone having a great sing song. Let the driver just drive, after all he/she is in charge of a lethal weapon and the sooner we treat a car (or truck or motorcycle) like that the safer we will all be. And start with better education for all, maybe some kind of mandatory advanced test within 2 years of your initial test, and a licence that expires with a re-test every couple of years to keep people on their toes.
Have a great Christmas and drive safely out there.