Vic "The Traveller" is officially dead.

[Old Skool]

49B Offence to consume intoxicating liquor while driving

(1) A person must not consume intoxicating liquor while the person is driving a motor vehicle or is in charge of a motor vehicle.

Penalty: 10 penalty units.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/rsa1986125/

10 penalty units = $1,221.40 in to the state coffers.

Another historic moment for democracy brought to you by the nanny state.

 

[fairdinkum]

I thought this was already illegal, to be honest.

Not that it should be.

Laughable that we still allow people to purchase grey/gun metal/black vehicles (which studies show to be far more likely to be involved in collisions than brightly-coloured cars) but we enforce laws like this. In fact, I can't remember the last time I had a 'near-miss' on the roads when the other vehicle was brightly-coloured, but can recall well a couple of instances in the last 12 months or so which involved darker-coloured cars.

 

[Cruyff14]

Yeah, I thought this was illegal ages ago. Unlikely you're going to get done though, if you get pulled over you hide the alcohol.

 

[crownie]

like others i thought this was illegal and think it should be illegal.

however i assume passengers are still allowed to have travellers? if not then thats crap.

 

[ManWithNoName]

I fail to see the problem with this. Seems a sensible law and a good deterrent.

 

[fairdinkum]

I fail to see the problem with this. Seems a sensible law and a good deterrent.

A deterrent from what? Exercising your legal right to have a relatively small amount of alcohol in your system?

 

[MadMac]

like others i thought this was illegal and think it should be illegal.

however i assume passengers are still allowed to have travellers? if not then thats crap.

It is about passengers, not drivers. Nothing new, the law has been around for a while, basically you get pinged for "street drinking" if you are a passenger in a car and have a drink. Probably, just the increase in penalty.

 

[crownie]

It is about passengers, not drivers. Nothing new, the law has been around for a while, basically you get pinged for "street drinking" if you are a passenger in a car and have a drink. Probably, just the increase in penalty.

thats rubbish then

 

[Old Skool]

I fail to see the problem with this. Seems a sensible law and a good deterrent.

It's another nanny state bullshit encroachment on personal freedom.

 

[LouisCK]

Baillieu is really trying to make people angry.

1. Banning bongs
2. Sicking the dogs on a bunch of peaceful protesters, and letting Robert Doyle feel important for the first time in his life in the process
3. Refusing to allow 18+ video games
4. Now this

I've said it before, Ill say it again: Rich people (who were born into obscene wealth) should not be allowed to work in politics. They have zero connection to the electorate and govern solely for the benefit of the wealthiest 1% of the state.

 

[J_Moore]

Is it about passengers? it uses "person" twice without indicating a change of subject.

 

[Bazzar]

It is about passengers, not drivers. Nothing new, the law has been around for a while, basically you get pinged for "street drinking" if you are a passenger in a car and have a drink. Probably, just the increase in penalty.

No its not, its about the driver. Its always been legal to have a drink when driving in Vic. Another stupid nanny state law. Wont stop me from having my 1 mid strength traveler on the way home each night.

 

[LouisCK]

Is it about passengers? it uses "person" twice without indicating a change of subject.

As a law student, I can guarantee you the word person will get repeated, repeatedly. Goes for any and all legislation. Shit its boring.

 

[MadMac]

Is it about passengers? it uses "person" twice without indicating a change of subject.

Well, I'm not 100% sure, however drink driving is obviously illegal and I suppose everyone knows that all too well. Drinking alcohol in the car is also illegal but a lot of people are unaware of that and at least in WA in legal terms it was considered as "street drinking" [unless something changed in the last few years]. Maybe they want to be more specific regarding the rule, I don't know.
I was pinged 5 years ago while driving taxi, 4 blokes were having a stubbie each, got pulled over by coppers and issued a $200 fine. At first, they were gonna charge me for each passenger [4x$200], then they weren't sure, eventually giving me a ticket for $200. Boys chipped in $50 each on top of the fare to cover it, good on them.

 

[WCErevival]

This law has been in for ages. You aren't even allowed on the street with an open beverage.

 

[MadMac]

No its not, its about the driver. Its always been legal to have a drink when driving in Vic. Another stupid nanny state law. Wont stop me from having my 1 mid strength traveler on the way home each night.

Sorry, didn't know that it was legal in Vic. I suppose I was talking about WA, but was certain that law existed in all states. I should've read the link.
All good.

 

[J_Moore]

As a law student, I can guarantee you the word person will get repeated, repeatedly. Goes for any and all legislation. Shit its boring.

Yeah, but it still needs to make grammatical sense, right? if 'person' in that sentence is meant to be referring to 2 different people, then I am outraged on behalf of the English language.

 

[LouisCK]

Yeah, but it still needs to make grammatical sense, right? if 'person' in that sentence is meant to be referring to 2 different people, then I am outraged on behalf of the English language.

It has to be very specific generally. Its clearly only referring to the driver the way I read it.

The 'in control' part would be in relation to fully licensed drivers observing a learner driver. i.e. you can't be knocking back frothies while teaching your 16 year old a three point turn.

 

[J_Moore]

The 'in control' part would be in relation to fully licensed drivers observing a learner driver. i.e. you can't be knocking back frothies while teaching your 16 year old a three point turn.

****ing nanny state gone mad.

 

[Old Skool]

This law has been in for ages. You aren't even allowed on the street with an open beverage.

That may be the case in W.A., a pioneering nanny state, but the second reading of the bill occurred only last Monday in Victoria.

 

[Old Skool]

Baillieu is really trying to make people angry.

1. Banning bongs
2. Sicking the dogs on a bunch of peaceful protesters, and letting Robert Doyle feel important for the first time in his life in the process
3. Refusing to allow 18+ video games
4. Now this

I've said it before, Ill say it again: Rich people (who were born into obscene wealth) should not be allowed to work in politics. They have zero connection to the electorate and govern solely for the benefit of the wealthiest 1% of the state.

It gets crooked politicians, cops etc. off the front page and continues the agenda of fear/protecter politics which has become the modern day political equivalent of kissing babies.

Did you happen to check out the tabloids when a bikie was shot in Victoria a week or so ago?

What is the first image we see plastered everywhere?

Yep, paramilitary cops wielding Steyr submachine guns .

Which happen to be completely useless 30 minutes after a shooting has occurred and gunmen have bolted.

However, politically, they are not there by accident. Another magnificent propaganda opportunity in the psychology of "protection politics".

 

[rocker_oz33]

l thought it was illegal aswell.from those if you drink and drive your a bloody idiot.but if you dont spill any your a bloody legend ads.

 

[Poetic Justice]

I don't do it very often at all, but I still don't see why it should be banned.

Other than the actual no holding items while you're driving, what's the problem if you consume a beverage that (under your own responsibility) will keep your BAC under 0.05?

 

[St 07]

Precisely! this law is a direct contradiction of the 0.5 law.

Do you know how many times I've pulled up to a bottleshop just to grab a beer, one beer, for the long drive home from work? Working in the sun from 6 to 5 probably doesn't help.

 

[Old Skool]

Precisely! this law is a direct contradiction of the 0.5 law.

How much longer do you think that is going to last?