Skip to main content

Tougher sentences for driving offenders?

A survey carried out by the UK’s Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM) points to tougher sentencing for driving offenders. According to the survey, 80% of respondents said that repeat drink drive offenders should have their vehicles seized and sold or scrapped. The poll also said that 50% of respondents think that this should also happen to drivers caught several times over the limit. The respondents were also behind reducing the drink-drive limit, with 66% wanting to see the limit reduced. Most said it sho
August 2, 2012 Read time: 2 mins
RSSA survey carried out by the UK’s 5125 Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM) points to tougher sentencing for driving offenders. According to the survey, 80% of respondents said that repeat drink drive offenders should have their vehicles seized and sold or scrapped. The poll also said that 50% of respondents think that this should also happen to drivers caught several times over the limit. The respondents were also behind reducing the drink-drive limit, with 66% wanting to see the limit reduced. Most said it should be lowered to a maximum of 50mg of alcohol/100ml of blood. A further 28% called for tougher sentences still, with a zero-tolerance policy. People convicted of drink driving generally lose their licence for a year and receive an average fine of €304 (£240). The survey said that 57% think this is too weak, and that punishments for drink drivers should be tougher, with 38% saying they should be much tougher. In additions, 55% of poll respondents support a proportionate, graduated system of penalties, if the limit was reduced. For example, lower penalties would be given to drivers caught under the current limit, but above the new one. Almost half of respondents admit to having a drink while driving, within the current limit. Some 79% say a decrease in the limit wouldn’t affect their enjoyment of an evening out, while 19% said it would. However, 84% said a reduction in the limit wouldn’t change their plans to go out.

IAM chief executive Simon Best said, “The support is there for tougher treatment of drink drivers. Not only do the majority want a lower limit – they also want tougher punishment for those that break the law, especially the worst offenders who present the greatest danger to other road users, their passengers and themselves. Our poll shows a desire to see more effective drink drive levels as well as much greater consistency of enforcement, prosecution, and sentencing, which reflects the level of danger associated with drinking drivers.”

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • Road markings important for road safety
    February 20, 2012
    Manufacturers are constantly upgrading marking materials and equipment. Now those responsible for highways are being asked to do more as Patrick Smith reports. A recent report claimed that nearly one-third of the length of Britain's single carriageway A-roads have white lines so worn out that they do not meet recognised standards. According to the LifeLines Report, an assessment of more than 2,400km of the road network, Britain's most dangerous roads have the most worn-out centre line markings of all, leavi
  • Call for a new EU road safety action plan
    April 30, 2012
    Members of the European Parliament have this week proposed over one hundred measures to improve road safety in the European Union. Their key aim is to better protect vulnerable road users, such as pedestrians, cyclists, children and the elderly.
  • Ukraine opts for Kistler Lineas WiM sensors
    June 18, 2021
    Lineas quartz WIM sensors from Swiss manufacturer Kistler are helping Ukraine’s Ukravtodor to tackle overloaded trucks in an effort to maintain good pavement conditions nationally.
  • EU cross-border traffic enforcement
    July 18, 2014
    Road safety campaigners and European traffic police are putting pressure on the EU to speed up the introduction of cross-border enforcement of traffic offences. The modified rules have been published by the European Commission and come in response to a European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling earlier this year saying that the existing law, which came into force in November last year, had been adopted on an incorrect legal basis. The ECJ has said the current rules could remain in effect until May 2015 while ne