Keep roads safe - breath test pedestrians

Author Topic: Keep roads safe - breath test pedestrians  (Read 7160 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mr anderson

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,355
    • WeAreChange Brisbane
Keep roads safe - breath test pedestrians
« on: May 05, 2010, 07:18:58 AM »
Keep roads safe - breath test pedestrians

By Miles Kemp
May 05, 2010

http://www.news.com.au/national/keep-roads-safe-breath-test-pedestrians/story-e6frfkvr-1225862347940?from=igoogle+gadget+compact+news_rss


    * Study pushes 0.15 limit for pedestrians
    * Drunk walkers cost insurers $50m a year
    * Public opinion turning against street drunks

RANDOM breath testing of pedestrians would be the most effective way to stop them being killed and maimed on the roads, a study has found. The University of Adelaide study found the public could support a blood alcohol limit of 0.15 when near roads and vehicles.

Researchers studied ways of reducing the road toll and found that all were "limited" in their success except for enforcement of a blood alcohol level in people walking near traffic, The Advertiser reported.

Commissioned by the Motor Accident Commission, the research was published in this month's Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine.

Quote
Countermeasures to the problem of accidents to intoxicated pedestrians
T.P. Hutchinson, C.N. Kloeden, V.L. Lindsay
Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine
April 2010 (Vol. 17, Issue 3, Pages 115-119) [Login required, and $31AU]
http://www.jflmjournal.org/issues/contents?issue_key=S1752-928X%2810%29X0002-6
Quote
I'm trying to obtain a free copy from the author

The study's author, Paul Hutchinson, said the measure would be very controversial to implement but public opinion was already turning against displays of public drunkenness and a blood alcohol limit of 0.15 could be accepted.

"Public opinion does change over time and people don't like drunks rolling about the streets and 0.15 is an alcohol content that most people would not reach, certainly in public," he said.

"As one public health advocate put it, we have a blood alcohol limit for driving, why not for people walking next to traffic. People already have the power to take into protective custody drunk people who are a danger to their or others' safety."

Between 2003 and 2007, 53 of the 58 adult pedestrian deaths in South Australia involved people who had been drinking, and half of the 1560 given hospital treatment had also been drinking.

A spokesman for Motor Accident Commission said that "drunk walkers" were a serious problem that cost the organisation $50 million each year in claims.

The University of Adelaide study also proposed less effective changes, including:

- RESPONSIBILITY taken by licensed venues for death or injury to drunk patrons on the road.

- MASS media campaigns such as those used to discourage drink driving.

- BETTER public transport near pubs and clubs.

- BUS services operated by licensed venues.

- PEDESTRIAN safety roadworks where accidents often happen.
WeAreChange Brisbane
I hold personal views, beliefs and opinions that do not necessarily reflect the beliefs and opinions of WeAreChange Brisbane as a whole.

Our Bitcoin address: 1Fzb4bp48oMr7CFzT3SbkTzKpMSvWW1X1t

Offline mr anderson

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,355
    • WeAreChange Brisbane
Re: Keep roads safe - breath test pedestrians
« Reply #1 on: May 05, 2010, 07:24:22 AM »
University of Adelaide study suggests pedestrians be breath tested

Tristan Willes, Miles Kemp
May 05, 2010

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/study-suggests-pedestrians-be-breath-tested/story-e6frea83-1225862262483


ADELAIDENOW readers are overwhelmingly opposed to the idea of pedestrians being breath-tested, as suggested by an University of Adelaide study. At 1pm, 82 per cent of 963 poll votes rejected the idea, with a mere 18 per cent supporting it.

While many commenters simply cried "nanny state", some had valid arguments against pedestrian breath-testing.

Yeti of Dulwich spoke for many readers who were tired of being kept on a tight leash.

"What next? Personal government chaperones every time we want to have a drink? As horrendous as pedestrian road deaths are, just as abhorrent is government intervention into every part of our lives," he wrote.

EmmDee of Foothills said alcohol would never be truly eliminated from our lives and that education was the key.

"The only recourse is to minimise the consequences of alcohol impairment by continued sensible education of the public and meaningful effective law enforcement!" she wrote.

Nathan of Adelaide said not only was the idea ridiculous, it would be unfair to judge drunkenness specifically by blood alcohol concentration.

"I know people who could blow 0.15 and still be in control of their actions, and I also know people who act far more stupidly than the heavy drinkers after just 2 or 3 beers," he wrote.

"I like the idea of co-ordination tests which give a MUCH better idea of how much someone is affected by alcohol, rather than just a one limit for all approach."

Chuck Norris of Reds had a more cynical view: "I would love to see how the cops would go breathalysing people in Hindley Street at 1am on a Saturday night. Half the people would be in excess of 0.3 BAC."

The readers were reacting to a study which found random breath testing of pedestrians would be the most effective way to stop them being killed and maimed on the roads. The University of Adelaide study found the public could support a blood alcohol limit of 0.15 when near roads and vehicles if it saved some of approximately 10 drink-walking pedestrians who die each year on SA roads.

Researchers studied ways of stopping the problem, which would all be "limited" in their success except for enforcement of a blood alcohol level in people walking near traffic. Commissioned by the Motor Accident Commission, the research was published in this month's Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine.

Study author and Centre for Automotive Safety Research senior research fellow Paul Hutchinson said the measure would be very controversial to implement but public opinion was already turning against displays of public drunkenness and a blood alcohol limit of 0.15 could be accepted.

"Public opinion does change over time and people don't like drunks rolling about the streets and 0.15 is an alcohol content that most people would not reach, certainly in public," he said.

"As one public health advocate put it, we have a blood alcohol limit for driving, why not for people walking next to traffic. People already have the power to take into protective custody drunk people who are a danger to their or others' safety."

Between 2003 and 2007, 53 of the 58 adult pedestrian deaths in South Australia involved people who had been drinking, and half of the 1560 given hospital treatment had also been drinking.

The University of Adelaide study also proposed less effective changes, including:

RESPONSIBILITY taken by licensed venues for death or injury to drunk patrons on the road.

MASS media campaigns such as those used to discourage drink driving.

BETTER public transport near pubs and clubs.

BUS services operated by licensed venues.

PEDESTRIAN safety roadworks where accidents often happen.

Road Safety Minister Jack Snelling was not available for comment and Motor Accident Commission spokesman Ben Tufnell said it was not the place of the organisation to make it illegal to be a drunk pedestrian.

He said "drunk walkers" were a serious problem that cost the organisation $50 million each year in claims.

The University of Adelaide study found the public could support a blood alcohol limit of 0.15 when near roads and vehicles if it saved some of approximately 10 drink-walking pedestrians who die each year on SA roads.

Researchers studied ways of stopping the problem, which would all be "limited" in their success except for enforcement of a blood alcohol level in people walking near traffic.

Commissioned by the Motor Accident Commission, the research was published in this month's Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine.

Study author and Centre for Automotive Safety Research senior research fellow Paul Hutchinson said the measure would be very controversial to implement but public opinion was already turning against displays of public drunkenness and a blood alcohol limit of 0.15 could be accepted.

"Public opinion does change over time and people don't like drunks rolling about the streets and 0.15 is an alcohol content that most people would not reach, certainly in public," he said.

"As one public health advocate put it, we have a blood alcohol limit for driving, why not for people walking next to traffic. People already have the power to take into protective custody drunk people who are a danger to their or others' safety."

Between 2003 and 2007, 53 of the 58 adult pedestrian deaths in South Australia involved people who had been drinking, and half of the 1560 given hospital treatment had also been drinking.

The University of Adelaide study also proposed less effective changes, including:

RESPONSIBILITY taken by licensed venues for death or injury to drunk patrons on the road.

MASS media campaigns such as those used to discourage drink driving.

BETTER public transport near pubs and clubs.

BUS services operated by licensed venues.

PEDESTRIAN safety roadworks where accidents often happen.

Road Safety Minister Jack Snelling was not available for comment and Motor Accident Commission spokesman Ben Tufnell said it was not the place of the organisation to make it illegal to be a drunk pedestrian.

He said "drunk walkers" were a serious problem that cost the organisation $50 million each year in claims.
WeAreChange Brisbane
I hold personal views, beliefs and opinions that do not necessarily reflect the beliefs and opinions of WeAreChange Brisbane as a whole.

Our Bitcoin address: 1Fzb4bp48oMr7CFzT3SbkTzKpMSvWW1X1t