CASE 3 — ‘Could happen again’

Press, 13 June 1978, Page 17

CASE 3 — ‘Could happen again’

A 22-year-old tradesman. stopped while driving his car home from a party, describes the incident as “just bad luck.” He was not weaving over the road and did not hit another vehicle. He was stopped by a traffic officer for having a noisy vehicle. “I thought I was okay, and not that far over so that I was unfit to drive,” he says. A blood test showed that he had a blood alcohol level of 143 mgm. He was fined $2OO and

was disqualified from driving for a year. He was however, allowed to drive to and from his place of work. He did not then (and does not now) see himself as a menace to other people on the road. If he had knocked someone over, then that person could also have been a drinking driver at some time, he says. In addition, he had no idea what it felt like to have a blood alcohol level of 100 mgm. He is not a heavy drinker and, he

says, unlike most of his workmates does not go the pub every night. He was hazy about the amount of alcohol which would affect his ability to drive efficiently. “It all depends on how much you eat at the time.” He was surprised when the crystals turned green in the breathalyser, and did not think he had drunk enough to have been over the legal limit. He does not suffer a feeling of guilt. “I just don’t think it is fair. Everyone drives while

drinking; it is just that I was unlucky to get caught.” While he considers the penalty harsh, he thinks it will deter him to some extent by making him more cautious. What about the mushroom development of huge “booze barns” and car parks in all major New Zealand cities? This young man has grown up with this kind of mass social drinking, in which car transport is an integral part. He accepts it without question.

Random testing of drivers, intensifed outside hotels and taverns, would have merit, he considers. “But it would only be acceptable if they did not start taking away people’s licences — perhaps if cops were stationed outside just warning people, or merely appearing on duty, that would act as a deterrent.” He also favours breath tests being accepted as evidence provided the apparatus is efficient. “It would save doctors’ fees

as I had to pay $2O for a blood test,” he comments.

The young man knows more about the inside of cars than most people and has been driving them since he was a lad. His attitude is summed up by his reply to the question: If he found himself in similar circumstances in the future, at the same sort of party, and having drunk about the same amount, what would he do? “I would still drive home,” he says.