- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Pint (picture copyright Simon MacMichael).jpegCyclists in Queensland, Australia to face random breath tests to ascertain if they are riding while drunk?
Cyclists in Queensland, Australia, as well as e-scooter riders, could face being randomly breath tested for excess levels of alcohol under plans put forward by the state government.
Current laws mean that police in the state, who are permitted to carry out random breath tests on drivers of motor vehicles, are unable do so on people travelling by bicycle or e-scooter, reports ABC Radio Brisbane.
The media outlet says that the state’s Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) will hold a consultation before any change to the law is implemented.
A TMR spokesperson said: “Before progressing any changes, consultation will be undertaken with key stakeholders and the community, including vulnerable road user groups.
“This work forms part of the Personal Mobility Safety Action Plan, which was released in mid-2022.”
While riders of bikes or e-scooters in Brisbane and elsewhere in Queensland cannot currently be asked to undertake a random breath test, they can be arrested, breathalysed and potentially fined should a police officer believe that they are under the influence of alcohol.
“Queensland police can and have enforced [penalties for] drink riding,” the spokesperson explained.
“Additionally, drinking alcohol while riding is an offence carrying an on-the-spot fine of $464.”
Mark Ryan, the state’s Police Minister, said that while random breath testing on drivers fell within the responsibility of the TMR, which would ultimately decide whether the law should be changed, he had asked the Queensland Police Service to discuss potentially extending it to other road users with the department.
As with many other subject areas, legislation surrounding e-scooters in Australia varies depending on the state or territory.
In Queensland, where new laws were introduced last year including setting speed limits, both private and hire e-scooters may be ridden.
In New South Wales, however, private e-scooters are banned from public roads, but trials of e-scooter hire schemes are being carried out in a number of areas – similar to the situation within the UK – and like here, riders of e-scooters, who are required to hold a driving licence, can face a ban and fine if found riding drunk.
In 2021, our sister site eBikeTips reported how the rider of an e-scooter was banned from driving for 12 months after he crashed in London’s Hyde Park, the impact also resulting in a broken leg for his dog, which he was carrying at the time.
Ramin Jabbari, who at the time was an electric scooter salesman, was breathalysed by police due to his slurred speech and apparent confusion, and was found to have 50 micrograms of alcohol in 100 millilitres of breath with the legal limit being 35.
Appearing at Westminster Magistrates’ Court, he was also fined £285 and agreed to undertake a driver rehabilitation course.
So far as cycling while intoxicated is concerned, the law firm Slater & Gordon summarises the position as follows: “It is illegal to ride your bike under the influence of drink or drugs, and you would be guilty of this if you were unfit to ride to such an extent as you are incapable of having proper control of the bicycle.
“You would be committing an offence whether you were on a footpath or on the road.
“Although it is an offence to cycle under the influence of alcohol, a police officer cannot force you to provide a breath, blood or urine sample. They can ask, but if you refuse and are subsequently charged with cycling under the influence, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) wouldn’t be allowed to use your refusal as evidence against you.”
The maximum penalty is £1,000, but as a non-driving offence, conviction would have no effect on the status of the cyclist’s driving licence, should they have one.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- Zebra 24 min 54 sec ago
One thing which will influence me next time I buy new wheels is the noise which the freehub makes - how loud it is. I have tinitus and am quite...
- David9694 1 hour 13 min ago
More notice needed for Remembrance Sunday road closures...
- chrisonabike 1 hour 54 min ago
This is an impressive new way of avoiding work by the police! Several crimes here (eg. phone use) - so is the new game "if we can identify *one*...
- HeadDown 2 hours 17 min ago
Which explains a lot. I reckon the standard of driving in the UK has noticeably decreased in the last 5-10 years. A host of factors no doubt, but I...
- Keykey1985 2 hours 52 min ago
He wasn't brake-checking me, he was trying to get me to stop. Nothing good would have come from me stopping.
- PRSboy 3 hours 10 min ago
It was designed around 28mm tyres but there's lots of clearance and could certainly take bigger tyres.
- Cugel 3 hours 13 min ago
A dinosaur version is shurely for the kiddies. Myself I'd like The Hindenburg. There may be The Freisian, filled with methane rather than hydrogen,...
- Rendel Harris 3 hours 27 min ago
When I see SLOW HORSES I always think ah, so this is where the ones I bet on are kept...
- chrisonabike 4 hours 8 min ago
No great mystery in either case, surely? Both US politician and the motor trade say "choose us and your life will be better and easier!" And other...
- stonojnr 6 hours 20 min ago
theres an attitude I encounter alot locally, and demonstrated in bucket loads by drivers on my commute home tonight, that cyclists shouldnt be on...
Add new comment
52 comments
Pedestrians don't share the road apart from crossing it though, and not at the speeds cyclists can manage. Any pedestrian drunkenly running amongst the traffic would soon be arrested.
Most drinkers can still ride a bike after three or four pints or more (I know I can, if I ride to the pub and have a few I'll push home but part of the route is across a (closed to cars at that time) large supermarket carpark, so I'll wobble across that). More than enough to impair their road sense, reaction times and sense of risk.
That's a fair point, though as a rule it's probably not a good idea to say we won't enforce one law (and cycling drunk is against the law, you just can't be breathalysed for it) because people might just break another. So make the penalty less severe but still enough to act as a deterrent, no points but a meaningful fine with increasing penalties for repeat offenders.
Maybe not in a city, but I've walked down single track roads after a pub session. It's still sharing the road when you cross it.
Your point about reaction times and risk applies equally to pedestrians.
I think when it comes to cycling and walking when under the influence, a breathalyser test is way over the top. As you rightly say about a pedestrian drunkenly running amongst the traffic being arrested (again, more likely in a city), it's the behaviour that matters. As it stands, the existing laws about it being illegal to be drunk in public are in my view totally adequate to address the threat.
I'd far rather someone walks, cycles or scoots after a few beers than decides to drive.
It really doesn't though, a drunk pedestrian approaching a junction whose reaction times/risk assessment is impaired might wander into the road but most likely at a speed where an attentive driver can react and avoid them; this is not going to be the case for a drunk cyclist approaching a junction at the bottom of the hill at 30 mph, if they get it wrong, they are under the wheels.
As above, there's really no comparison between a drunken pedestrian and a drunken cyclist; in terms of cycling, scooting, or driving on the roads after a few beers I'd rather someone doesn't do any of them, it's not an either/or situation, walking, public transport, cabs or a lift home from a sober friend are all available.
There are a lot of what-ifs with this statement. A drunk pedestrian walking into the road from behind a parked van might be harder for a driver to see than a drunk cyclist doing 40mph down a hill on a wide open country road.
There's an argument that even walking after a few beers is ill-advised. We could say that breathalysing pub-goers as they leave the establishment would be a sensible precaution. With a taxi/wheelchair called for those above a certain limit. I do think a cyclist is far more like a pedestrian in terms of risk to both themselves and to others. Certainly in comparison with a motorised vehicle.
Absolutely we are nowhere near as dangerous as cars, but I can never really agree with the "we're pretty much like pedestrians" (pedestrians don't have to wear lights at night, why don't people lobby for pedestrian helmets etc) argument. Pissed pedestrians, unless Usain Bolt is having a particularly big night out, don't mix with motorised traffic at 15-25 mph and so are far less likely to do themselves harm or to cause accidents, either directly or because of the actions people have to take to avoid them. That's why I think it's appropriate to have a higher level of regulation for cyclists than pedestrians in this area, even if it's not as high as that for motorists.
The view from the North says hold my beer...!
https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/24008377.footage-man-breaks-ribs-...
Really? I've never heard that before and would be surprised that anti-cycling groups haven't used it if it was true.
According to this article, the percentage for pedestrians is even higher, at 39% in the US: https://www.dudleydebosier.com/drunk-pedestrians-at-greater-risk-of-gett...
It doesn't necessarily mean they are at fault.
Perhaps the cyclist-haters aren't aware of the statistic.
I can only guess that you must live in a very well-behaved community with lots of wide pavements. Shrewsbury's streets are not all like that on a Saturday night. The last time I collected my wife from a night out with friends there were groups scattered everywhere, shouts, cat-calls, aggression and people running or stumbling across the road; her 'friend' was unable to stand up straight let alone walk home, though she still managed to abuse virtually everyone she interacted with.
When you get out of the town centre there is little or no provision for pedestrians and we have to run the gauntlet of drivers who think they own the road. This happens each time I go for a walk along the 2 quiet lanes (AKA rat runs) near our edge-of-town estate.
If it can be shown that drunk cyclists are a genuine issue then by all means do something to address it; but while there are many more and worse crimes being committed, mostly by drivers, then I think it is a waste of time and a misuse of police resources.
I would say from my empirical observations that they are genuine issue, at least in London: it's very difficult for anyone to produce statistics about this because clearly the police don't bother stopping people at the moment because there is no offence of a cyclist simply being over the limit. However, I don't agree that the police should ignore some crimes just because there are worse ones going on, by that logic they should ignore shoplifting because there are bank robberies, or ignore speeding because there are drunk drivers. Riding pissed in traffic is an incredibly stupid and dangerous thing to do, I can see no harm at all in there being stronger deterrents to it.
Not addressing the should/shouldn't but just wondering realistically what level of policing of this (and penalties) would be a *deterrent*?
Drink driving - that's taken decades and still goes on (and driving intoxicated is a thing). While it did require police action / fear of getting caught I suspect it was mostly a change in societal attitude. Not sure how that would work with cycling? Although some people are already happy to say "just don't cycle" - to the sober.
Probably numbers and "who's doing it" needed here for "what priority to assign" - eg. as mentioned is it often those who have been banned from driving?
Well, may sound a bit authoritarian but I'd have no problem with police check stations as used in other countries - everyone on a certain road at a certain time (after closing most logical) gets stopped and tested, cars and bikes alike. Penalty for cyclists, bike confiscated and only returned on collection from police station with proof that fine (£100?) has been paid. People on hire bikes reported to hire company and barred from further rentals (and fined). Repeat offenders to have driving licences endorsed, some suitable additional penalty TBA for those without licences. Not quite my usual woolly liberal self I know but I really do have a horror of drink driving by all road users - even those who are "less dangerous than XYZ", less dangerous doesn't mean safe.
Blimey!
Mostly with you but I'm concerned about best use of finite police resources. Plus the unintended consequences given our existing failures to effectively police the roads - and certainly disqualified drivers. Plus the realities of selective policing (HP has noted the way in which this can go with the example of Australia ... and then there's the Met).
I don't think cycling intoxicated is a trivial matter. However maybe worth looking at NL and Scandinavia (where they are certainly hot on policing drinking-related matters)? Noting that the calculation may change with mass cycling (obviously we're not near there yet, exceptions like Central Cambridge (?) aside). Because that *requires* space for cyclists, separated from both motor vehicles and pedestrians.
Meanwhile in West Mercia, according to the Shropshire Star:
Imagine how many they'd catch if the police had adequate resources.
Aussie on holiday in Europe, other then the thousands of bike parked all around Amsterdam, was surprise by the number of people riding, chatting to friends, using mobile phones, smoking, dodging pedestrians and just going on with their daily life. Back in Melbourne that behaviour would be frown upon, using a mobile phone would see you cop a $400 fine, not to mention the complaint about footpath ride, particularly e-scooters, that the local media will blow out of proportion by 1000% just to get click bait. I just think European are a bit more mature then the us Aussie when it comes to cycling. Just my observation, cheers.
I hope you aren't including us Brits in that..
I suspect even us Brits are a bit more mature than Australians, when it comes to attitudes around cycling…
Agree, was in London back in 2016 and found your cycling culture far more mature than Australia. I am from Melbourne and while we do have cycling it's not near the same standard. Car rule and what little space is provided for cycling on the road always vanish at the next intersection. We do have some very nice shared paths along freeways, rivers, creeks but they can be limiting for certain tasks. Helmet law also has stifled any growth in cycling, as it is now viewed as a dangerous activity were falling of a bicycle could mean sudden death. Anti cycling media really does not help, they love to target any thing on two wheels just for click bait, e-scooters are the current target.
Anyway just my thoughts.
I like the high rising terminal in the headline, really gives it an authentic Australian feel?
I see what you did there?
An excellent use of police resources I'm sure, given the hundreds of deaths caused by drunk cyclists every year in Queensland.
Why are you looking at me like that?
Because these comments may be searched/read by people who aren't party to the larger conversation, don't have the relevant context, may have an agenda, etc., etc., I feel obliged to be the buzzkill who points out: that comment was sarcastic.
Drunk cyclists do not actually kill hundreds of people per year and in general are not actually a large problem, and using scarce resources to police them while ignoring actual problems is disingenuous and incompetent in the extreme.
Pages