Alcohol Plays “Major Role” In Traffic Fatalities

November 23, 2013

A new study by the Department of Health [DOH] confirmed that alcohol plays a major role in Bermuda’s road traffic fatalities.

The study, entitled, “The Influence of Alcohol in Road Traffic Accidents and Fatalities in Bermuda over the Past Three Years” also found that there is a correlation between heart disease and excessive or prolonged alcohol consumption.

The findings of the study were made available for the Annual Meeting of the Bermuda Drug Information Network [BerDIN] on October 24th 2013.

The Ministry said, “Alcohol is one of the underlying causes in accidents of all types, whether domestic, recreational or control of vehicles [e.g. motor cycles, motor cars or marine vehicles]. Under the Road Traffic Act 1947, Bermuda’s legal blood alcohol limit is 80 milligrams per 100 milliliters.

Alcoholic Drink and Car Keys

“The aim of this DOH study was to determine if there is a correlation between blood alcohol levels in drivers of vehicles involved in road traffic accidents and fatalities and also to determine if there is some correlation between alcohol and morbidity rates. The information used was taken from pathology and toxicology findings from 2010 to present.

“When one is suspected of driving under the influence [DUI], blood samples are only taken when an accident occurs that renders the person unable to blow into a breath analyzer due to their injuries. Venous blood samples are transported to the lab for analysis.

“If a person succumbs to their injuries, an autopsy in carried out. In this case of sudden death, biological samples are collected and sent for toxicology analyses. The findings are then reported and sent to the pathologist to determine factors contributing to death.

“The determination of alcohol content is carried out by chromatography which allows for a fast, simple and very reproducible measurement of alcohol content. Samples collected in preserved specimen tubes were analysed and the data collated according to its categories [e.g. DUI, RTF (Road Traffic Fatality) and “sudden other” were alcohol was present].

Data Findings

In 2010 there were 15 suspected DUI cases where blood was taken, and nine of these individuals contained alcohol in their systems.

Eight Road Traffic Fatalities that same year had alcohol in their systems, with documented injuries ranging from sub cranial or sub dural hemorrhaging to blunt impact or chest and abdominal trauma.

Out of 32 sudden deaths in 2010, 50 percent contained alcohol and/or drugs of abuse. 94% were males aged from 20 to 65 years.

Some of the circumstances around the sudden deaths documented heart disease, drowning, heart failure-pulmonary oedema, found unresponsive, left ventricle failure -fatty liver cardiac arrest, sudden collapse, homicide and coronary artery occlusion.

In 2011 there were 27 sudden deaths that included RTFs and 23 suspected DUI cases. Due to the closure of the lab at the end of 2010, some of the 2011 cases were sent overseas; therefore the results are not represented in this study. However, cases received during the latter part of 2011 were analysed in the lab which resulted in four having alcohol present in their system and were all male.

In 2012 there were 23 suspected DUI cases where blood was taken, of which 14 had alcohol present in their system.

There were four RTFs, listing various injuries due to trauma, which had alcohol in their system and out of 43 sudden deaths in 2012, 21 percent of the samples contained alcohol and or drugs of abuse recording only one being female.

Circumstances around sudden death cases for that year included: found unresponsive, suspected drug user, hemorrhage, gunshot wound, homicide, heart attack and heart disease.

Until October of this current year, 2013, 11 suspected DUI cases were submitted where blood was taken and two showed alcohol present. However, others had either no alcohol or had tested positive for a drug(s).

Five RTFs were confirmed to have alcohol in their system and some in combination with a drug(s) and nine sudden deaths contained alcohol or drugs and alcohol.

Circumstances around sudden deaths were alcohol or alcohol and drugs were confirmed documented homicide, Ethanol cirrhosis, homicide, found unresponsive and heart disease. They were all noted to be male.


From the review of the data it can be seen that alcohol plays a major role in RTFs. The cases of DUI, where venous blood is drawn and analyzed, can be thought of as those who have just missed being a RTF.

This study suggests that chronic alcohol abuse is associated with an increased risk of sudden death. Frequently listed pathology findings include heart disease, fatty liver [ethanol cirrhosis] and heart failure. These findings are all well documented in literature in connection with cases of prolonged or excessive alcohol consumption [link].

Most of Bermuda’s RTFs were single vehicle accidents which took place late at night or in the early hours in the morning. It is important to underscore that RTFs that occurred during the day did not contain any alcohol.

The World Health Organization provides well documented information on the Global Information System on Alcohol and Health monitoring trends on alcohol related harm. [link]


“This study further highlights the adverse impact of alcohol on, not only individuals and their families, but also on our society and economy,” said the Minister of Health and Seniors Patricia Gordon-Pamplin.

“The Ministry of Health and Seniors wants Bermuda residents to think twice before getting behind the wheel after drinking; or into a vehicle where the driver has consumed alcohol, especially leading up to and during the holiday season.

“DUI and excessive or frequent alcohol consumption is making a significant adverse impact on families and in communities. The data speaks for itself.”

Chief Medical Officer Dr. Cheryl Peek-Ball said she supported the research and the importance of bringing to light the significant role that alcohol plays in Bermuda in sudden death, injury and chronic disease.

“This study allows us to acknowledge the social and health impact of alcohol and provides evidence to challenge the common perception that this legal, socially accepted drug is harmless,” she said. “Consequences of irresponsible or excessive use are clearly very significant and should not be ignored.”

The Department for National Drug Control said, “Alcohol is the most commonly used substance among Bermuda’s residents. Its use and misuse are widely documented in local research among youths, college-age students, and the adult population. For many residents, alcohol has become engrained in the social fabric. The environment in Bermuda is such that alcohol is easily accessible, affordable, and readily available to all residents; even those yet to reach the legal age of consumption [18 years].

“The Bermuda Assessment Referral Center [BARC] has reported that amongst all new clients [n=149] assessed for substance use dependence or abuse in 2012, 73 indicated alcohol as their drug of choice; and of those persons referred for residential treatment services, at both the Men’s and Women’s Treatment Centers, alcohol is usually indicated as the first substance of experimentation with the age of first use being as low as eight years for some clients.

“In 2012, four men who presented for services said their primary drug of choice was alcohol; whereas, there were no women in treatment who said their primary drug of choice was alcohol during the same time period.

“The Department for National Drug Control advocates for responsible alcohol behaviour and advises that if you do not currently drink alcohol, don’t start. If you do consume alcohol, do so responsibly.”

Read More About

Category: Accidents and fires, All, News

Comments (98)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Nuffin but da Truth says:

    the D of H and the Bermuda Road Council need to get signs up all over Bermuda…DONT DRINK and DRIVE! and keep them up 365.

    on 2nd thoughts,forget it,it would be a waste of time!

    • Martin Chivers says:

      Forget signs, random breath tests on fri/sat eves around Hamilton, or major events.

      The fact that the police ignore the rugby classic is an outrage, half the people there drink and drive!

      • enough says:

        Random breath tests require legislative change. Go whine to your MP.

        • Bermy says:

          Why do they need legislative change? At any time now they can breathalyze you if they suspect driving while impaired. Surely they can do random checks under suspecting anyone driving is suspected of drunk driving especially from large events and gatherings (i.e. rugby classic, sports games, concerts). Sadly drink driving is part of our culture and it does need to change radically. I understand such stops would be an inconvenience, but surely a call to say someone you know has been hurt or worse killed is much more inconvenient.

          • enough says:

            There are no roadside breathaliser kits anyway and to do anything ‘random’ on the road requires legislative change.
            You are correct that if there exists some suspicion then that person can be signalled to stop and observations made but they have to have been seen driving to form those initial opinions and this then backed up with some physical signs of impairment as judged by the officer. Hardly a perfect system.

            • Lebron says:

              Imperfect, but really easy to change. These are roadside breath tests, every forward thinking country has them, they cost nothing. I fear it is because the senior police/judges/politicians like saving the taxi fare.

          • Tyler says:

            Bermp, you are completely wrong.

        • Lebron says:

          Is saving lives whining to your MP?

          I think you need a reality check pal.

          • enough says:

            No, you need the reality check. I’m telling you that to implement roadside breath testing at random or otherwise, requires legislative change; believe it or don’t but go check. So, rather than whine that the police aren’t doing their job, take your complaint to your MP where it belongs. Ask them to hurry along with the changes required to make this a reality. That will save lives. Blaming the police might seem cool to you, but it’s ill-informed.
            I want to be clear that the police can and should do better in many areas but in this their hands are to a large degree tied.
            And FYI, one DUI arrest equals about 4hrs of processing assuming you’re first in the line. Set up a random road check and arrest 10, the island has 1 designated machine and 1 designated custody area to receive them. Prisoners are processed individually. All but the first 2 maybe would be sober when eventually tested and the island would be devoid of officers on the street as they remain with the prisoners for hours on end.
            This inefficiency is again, legislative, not policing policy and procedure.
            So I say again, go whine to your MP. Go have a march like Friday cos that was all about saving lives wasn’t it??
            Genuises like you and Y-gurl, sat at a computer are great, ideas are good but action is what is required.
            Kindly report back with your progress.

      • Mazumbo says:

        @ Martin Chivers you have a point but that would be profiling but than again a certain segment of society have been experiencing that for decades and ending up on de stop list!!!!!!!!!!!

  2. Family Man says:

    In a similarly designed study, it was found that motor vehicles played a major factor in all traffic fatalities.

  3. Common cent$ says:

    There needs to be a serious crackdown on drunk drivers and speeders before we get in to the holidays. An aggressive crackdown on offenders will save lives. Take them off the road! Make a very simple law in regards to speeding— drive over 70kph– lose your license!! That is twice the speed limit, and anyone that is against that– are probably the ones speeding like that.

    • @ common cent$……I bet you dont know that drunk drivers cause the least amount of accidents, according to the official police statistics realeased every year. Out of 1800 + accidents in 2011 …..84 were from drunk drivers, thats less than 5%……..educating the real accident causers ,, inattention, speeding , following to close, now thats a big one. If we want safer roads we need better education and a harder drivers test first. The article stated that HALF the deaths were from drunk drivers, who was the other half. I am certainly against people who go and drink irresponsible and get so under the influence they can hardly walk and then get in a car or on a bike. Roadside breathelizer tests would lead to a call of discrimination again and thats why the police had to curb their gang related roadside checks.

      • Joseph Froncioni says:


        With all due respect, I beg to differ. The police stats are meaningless, incorrect and not at all representative of what really goes on on our roads. I tried to illustrate this in an article I wrote for the RG in February.

        In a nutshell, police are, by and large, ignoring drunk drivers at accident scenes because the present system makes it extremely cumbersome and time consuming to book someone for a DUI. (See my article for the two examples that I experienced.) So, when a police officer attends the scene of an accident, he’ll ask you what happened and unless you admit that you’ve been drinking and/or speeding, those 2 factors are never included in the report and so never make it into the Police stats. You can take police stats and chuck them.

        On a professional level, I can tell you that we do blood alcohols for virtually all patients who present to ED with road injuries and I can assure you that the vast majority are over the limit. The police who come into ED to fill out their accident reports know full well that the patient is under the influence but hardly ever, and by that I mean never exercise their right, and some might say duty to draw blood alcohol or drug levels which would be needed to prosecute. (see Road Traffic Amendment Act 1997)

        So, what I’m saying is that we as a society and the Bermuda Police Service in particular are turning a blind eye to our drinking and driving problem. Don’t get me wrong: this is not being done maliciously. It’s just that the system needs fixing and we have not elected a politician who has a pair big enough to tackle the problem in an effective way. Not sure what it takes but I’ll tell you that in recent weeks, we have seen an explosion of very serious road traffic injuries including ruptured aortas and fractured spines that will cost you and me many millions of dollars in treatment for many years to come.

        • enough says:

          Wholeheartedly agree with you Sir and I read your article. Those ‘constables’ should be disciplined at best because that obviously amounts to neglect of duty.
          Please be careful when stating things like ‘never’ as you did above. Your word, if you are indeed the good Doctor, carries great weight and I know for a fact that blood is regularly drawn. I will bow to your superior, albeit apparently anecdotal, evidence that it is seldom as compared to the opportunities presented to do it but nonetheless to assert ‘never’ is unfair and just plain wrong.
          That said, my point to a couple of posters here has been that ‘signs of impairment’ is entirely unsatisfactory as a benchmark on which to base anything.
          In the UK, you’re involved in ANY form of accident, even if you are entirely innocent when someone runs into the back of you as you wait at a light, you are routinely (or should be) breathalysed.
          This removes the human interpretation of impairment and that has been my point when shifting ‘blame’ to the politicians. They have known this is the route to go for years. It’s hardly rocket science is it?
          Bermuda still awaits road side testing kits of any description and that speaks to the political will to deal with the problem.

          • Joseph Froncioni says:


            I am so frustrated about the alcohol related carnage that I have seen that I tend to get carried away. I have to agree with you that NEVER is incorrect. However, on a spectrum of ALWAYS all the way to NEVER, I can assure you that the truth lies much, much closer to NEVER.
            Thank you for your insightful comment.

            • enough says:

              I’m with you Doc and want to thank you for your continued efforts to bring some calm to the roads.

            • Joe, the ordinary person like myself can only go by the official police statistics. I would like to hear from the Police Commissioner with regards to your comments and your personal statistics. On a legal note can a police officer take blood samples from a patient at KEMH if he is unconscious thereby unable to give his permission for this to be done and can your blood samples that you take be legally used in a court of law.

              I can understand your frustration with regards to all of this but there seems to be some serious misunderstanding between yourself and the BPS. The whole situation would need some serious law changes, and like you say with regards to a politician will to do so.


              • Joseph Froncioni says:


                There is no misunderstanding and the legislation is already in place. You can read the Road Traffic Amendment Act 1997 online.

                When police suspect impairment, they can require blood or other body fluids from an individual. Refusal is an offence. This sample must be obtained by a designated, trained medical person (doctor or nurse) who acts on behalf of the police. Because the sample is forensic evidence, the person obtaining it cannot be the treating physician or nurse in the ED as this would be a breach of medical ethics. In the case of an injured or unconscious patient, the treating physician must sign a statement indicating that is is safe for a sample to be obtained. Any blood or other sample that is obtained by the treating physician, and we nearly always obtain a blood alcohol level, is for treatment purposes only and cannot be used against the patient as forensic evidence in court.

                So, all of the legislation is already in place; they just don’t bother doing it because the process is cumbersome, i.e. the officer has to get the police doctor or nurse to come in, usually in the middle of the night, and draw the sample and this, it seems, is too much trouble.

                With regards accident stats, these would be entirely different and reflect the true incidence of DUI if roadside and accident scene breath testing was in force. This, however, would require legislative change.

                • Truth is killin' me... says:

                  “Any blood or other sample that is obtained by the treating physician, and we nearly always obtain a blood alcohol level, is for treatment purposes only and cannot be used against the patient as forensic evidence in court.” Why can’t this be changed into law?

                • Joe,

                  Thanks for the update and good information. I think breathtesting for every single accident would be a very cumbersome experience for the BPS. Serious accidents yes but can you imagine the amount of work that would be required to do this. I am sure the politicians take this into consideration when drafting a law, and I am sure they discuss same with the Comm of Police. After lookind at the Police statistics again I see that there were 27 serious injury accidents for 2012 that required ICU…..stilll not a large number considering the total number of accidents for the year. The carnage on our roads can be reduced a lot more if serious fines like that administered to DUI would go across the board for speeding and bad driving habits etc, I still observe people talking and texting while driving, which has lead to serious accidents and deaths here. I guess the point i am trying to convey is that a large number of road users have no regard for the laws of the highway but unless they get caught for DUI they virtually get away scot free with a light fine and very little time of the road if any. We need a complete redrafting of the fines etc for ALL drivers who disobey our rules of the road, which is very unlikely to happen politically as you state often.


                  • enough says:

                    Depending on the device chosen, breath testing at every accident scene would add about 1 minute to the ‘investigation’; tell the driver the law, make a statutory requirement of them to provide a sample of breath, they blow, 10 seconds later the machine advises whether the person is likely to fail a full analysis at the station. Of course it could add many hours if the result is positive but then more drink drivers would be being caught and that is 50% of the point here is it not? The other 50% being prevention of accidents in the first place.
                    Road side testing (random and statutory) s absolutely key to combatting the culture in Bermuda and that requires legislative change and it’s so easy.

              • enough says:

                The 2 examples the Doc cites in his RG article are examples of poor policing but he is just a bit too vociferous in his charge that police are choosing to ignore the law on a perpetual basis.
                He states in his response to you, “When police suspect impairment”….here lies the crux of the problem.
                Ok, so the police turn up to a 2 bike accident, both riders are badly injured and being treated by EMTs….the likelihood of policing obtaining ‘evidence’ that they will have to swear to under Oath at court, that either of those persons is displaying signs of impairment is not great. The onus lies with the officer, not a seasoned, experienced professional like Doc Froncioni who is better able to interpret physical signs that a mere constable, especially in a person not speaking and not moving.
                The system is the problem AND police can do better but even if police are not following through because the system is cumbersome, well, that’s unacceptable but the system can still be made less cumbersome and I covered that above.
                The system for dealing with accidents to detect impairment is SO simple to rectify that it’s barely even amusing. The fact it hasn’t been done with one stroke of a politician’s pen and the purchasing of some roadside testing kits, tells me that the political will simply isn’t there.
                I am not a politician, I don’t draft legislation but when our ‘learned’ Magistrates started disposing of DIU cases without a ban because legislation allowed them to do that, that law was tightened in quick time.
                It can be done.

  4. Truth is killin' me... says:

    Well DOH…DUUUH!! It isn’t ROCKET SCIENCE!!!!4am “accidents” in the morning and half of the island’s walls knocked down the next day. PLEASE!!!!!!

  5. Sandy Bottom says:

    The data says that “alcohol or drugs” were in the bloodstream of many people involved in fatalities. Why is the DOH only mentioning alcohol?

  6. N/A says:

    They needed a study to tell people this? How bout their next study prove that Bermuda is actually surrounded by water…

  7. Come On Man says:

    Oh i thought is was Texting while driving or tinted windows

  8. Setting the scene to legalize/decriminalize weed…??

  9. Impressive says:

    still alcohol is legal and sold in stores, soon to be sold on Sundays. Meanwhile the grass that grows from the earth is illegal… life

    • Just One says:

      Not everything that grows from earth is good for you, just saying, but weed can be good for some, in moderation. Unfortunately even if it was legal, it would still get abused… A lot of people that drink don’t want to drink everyday, whereas a lot of people that smoke want to smoke everyday. Just wish people wouldn’t depend on mind altering substances to get through life…SMH

      • Bermy says:

        And also alot of people that drink want to drink everyday and people that smoke don’t want to smoke everyday. You have a null point. If you don’t like it don’t do it, let adults make adult decisions. Everything has the ability to be abused, fatty foods, porn, gambling. Its going to happen in a free society.

    • Sandy Bottom says:

      Yeah, because driving under the influence of drugs is perfectly safe.

  10. Dangel says:

    @Sandy Bottom
    The data says that “alcohol or drugs” were in the bloodstream of many people involved in fatalities. Why is the DOH only mentioning alcohol?

    Alcohol is always mentioned specifically as this society we live in views alcohol as a legal drug. The report is very timely and has indicated nothing new as most people are or should be aware of the impact alcohol has on society. The OBA has granted permission for stores to sell even more alcohol on a Sunday is ludicrous – pure greed and all about businesses!

    • Sandy Bottom says:

      But the impact of drugs on road traffic fatalities is being overlooked. Why?

      • Tommy Chong says:

        Ethanol is a drug so they aren’t overlooking drugs they’re just focusing on the one causing the most traffic fatalities. Once they solve that massive problem maybe they can focus on the one that causes the driver to be so paranoid of the police they end up driving under 35k.

        • Sandy Bottom says:

          They’re ignoring the safety impact of the use of other drugs.

          • Come Correct says:

            But how would they measure the safety impact of these other drugs? There was a little test done on the effect of driving under the influence of cannabis and all 3 drivers did better high than sober. Not saying I think it’s ok for people to drive high or that everyone is capable but the rest of these substances are illegal(so no real way to compile data) and we have no means of testing for these substances in the case of an accident other than a blood test which only proves the person is a user and not that they were under the influence at the time.

            • Sandy Bottom says:

              The report says 50% were under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Their presence can certainly be detected in an autopsy.

              The idea that someone drives better while high on marijuana s ridiculous.

              • Toodle-oo says:

                **The idea that someone drives better while high on marijuana is ridiculous.**

                I’m glad that I’m not the only one who choked on that ridiculous statement.

                I’ve been in the company of a good few people who have been high , or smoked a joint if you want to be anal about choice of words , and I most certainly would not let them operate a car or bike with me in or on it afterwards .

                Can we be real here for a minute , please ? In an effort to see the ‘legalization’ of herb a lot of people are making some very stupid statements.

                • Come Correct says:

                  I’m talking about one test here with 3 people, then see what I say after. Thanks.

    • Triangle Drifter says:

      Why would more alcohol be sold just because it is available in stores on Sundays. As it stands now do you not buy the Sunday supply before Sunday? A convenience, yes, especially to visitors who & more than likely used to being able to buy at home on a Sunday, but hardly any noticeable increase in sales for the stores week over week.

  11. Y-Gurl says:

    We are paying the civil service to come up with this drivel, the “facts” that came out of this expensive study have been known since the invention of the wheel, I cannot believe this is how our money is spent! Try the “major role” being the fact that we have a police service that only seem to catch DUI when the are “at the scene” in other words the bent their car or bike so can’t go anywhere, the cops should be made to do what they are paid for, sure they could not prevent drink driving but could make a serious impact on accident and fatality prevention by catching the drunk driver BEFORE the accident but unfortunately we are saddled with this ineffective service and it’s doubtfull these or any other crime figures will improve anytime soon especially given the leadership they have.

    • enough says:

      Rather than spew your usual ‘blame-everything-on-the-police’ nonsense, go read the legislation and when you spot the glaring holes in it that would allow the police to be able to better impact driving behaviour, go whine to your MP.

      • Paradox says:

        Y-Gurl is correct, I think we are all in a good position to blame everything that’s wrong or isn’t getting attention within law and order on those who are paid to uphold law and order but either can’t or don’t, Perhaps instead of silly comments you should read the crime stats for the last 10 years, and you’ll see the cops number, training, budget, facilities have soared but murders , robberies and capital crimes have also soared it’s always easier to blame the politicians I guess…officer

        • enough says:

          Unfortunately your comment doesn’t pass the facts checker either. Simply look at the most recent stats released and you’ll see that total crime dropped 28% between 2008 and 2012.
          (Bernews have it on the front page just in case you cared to look)
          Of course the high profile crimes of which you speak have been a recent phenomenon and even someone as biased as Y-Gurl would have to admit..not a fault of the police…or maybe she and you wouldn’t agree.
          Anyway, we can play this game ad nauseum, I just prefer facts and balance in an argument whereas you pair prefer hyperbole and sweeping statements that can be easily refuted.
          So, I’ll leave you in the sand box with your toys.

      • Y-Gurl says:

        That’s a bit of an odd reply, even for you, I “blame everything on the police” only those things the police are responsible for but are incapable of doing, it so our duty to point out failings in systems and here we have a BPS that’s is totally ineffective, partly due do leadership, partly the fact we bring in 3rd rate rejects from overseas, and partly due to the 7th or 8th grade BPS entrance testing. So sorry if your uncomfortable with the truth but in any other place you would be held accountable, now if you screwed up your account may be just that however if you are consistently producing bad or no results you get moved out….simple and over the last 9years the facts speak volumes, and blaming it on Goverment is just a cop out!

        • Tyler says:

          Y-Gurl, you are so predictable. The BPS is “…totally ineffective…” Do you really believe that? The way you carry on leads me to believe that you either tried to join the BPS and couldn’t pass the entrance exam, or you were in the BPS for a short period of time and were wither fired or left because you could not do the job.

        • enough says:

          Number of Crimes at Ten Year Low
          Between 2003 and 2012, total crime in Bermuda reached its peak in 2008 and then decreased each year until it reached its lowest level in 2012. There was a 28% drop in total crime from 2008 to 2012 and a 9% decline from 2011 to 2012. As indicated by Figure 1, the sharp fall in Crimes Against Property (-36%) from 2008 to 2012 was largely responsible for the reduction in total crime over this period.

          So, as you say….”…over the last 9 years the facts speak volumes…”.

          I’ll pass on your congratulations to the police officers, the community and the various Governments of the day that are working together to get a grip on the scourge that is criminality.

          • Paradox says:

            I rather think the community is concerned about the shootings, murders, armed robberies etc this is where the rise is over the last 6 years and would be less concerned about the reported theft of bacon from the marketplace going down

            • enough says:

              Hey, they are horrendous and rightly get much of the publicity. Maybe at some point you’ll actually look at the stats I referred you to. Even if you do, you’ll be able to use your bias to show % increases in various crime types, I can use mine to show decreases. The headline in an impartial report states that crime levels, total crime, is at a 10 year low.
              That is a very positive thing.

  12. sage says:

    With all this damning evidence that alcohol kills plenty people here,do Michael Dunkley and David Burt,who both declare their opposition to legalizing herb, which has killed no one ever,support making alcohol illegal and having those caught consuming, supplying and manufacturing devil’s soup (and of course cancer sticks) arrested and incarcerated like those involved in “drugs of abuse”(as opposed to prescription drugs which we all know are never abused despite someone dying every 19 minutes in the US from their use.)Why did we legalize alcohol sales on sunday’s again? The word conspiracy comes to mind.

  13. The Messenger says:

    SOLUTION: Close down ALL the rum $hop$ and it will solve Bermuda’s fatal road traffic accidents, domestic and other violence, criminal activities of every description, poverty, and addiction–alcoholism.

    Take it from one who knows. I am an ACOAA (an adult child of an alcoholic).

    • Family Man says:

      You and Sage would fit right in in Saudi Arabia.

      In Saudi, there’s no booze at all and drug possession can get your head chopped off. They don’t even allow women to drive. And all that dessert; no twisty curves or narrow roads or trees blocking their view. They must have the safest driving record in the world.


      Saudi has one of the highest road accident death tolls in the world.

      • Sandy Bottom says:

        Interesting point.

      • J Starling says:

        Of interest? From 2010:

        “The driving problems are with young people,” Ali Abdul-Rahman Al-Mazyad, a Saudi columnist in Riyadh told The Media Line. “There are very little outlets for young people to enjoy themselves and kids basically do what they want.”

        “There is also not such great education in schools about driving and respecting the road,” he said. “Drug use is also a contributing factor. These are the central problems.”

        The report found that almost a third of traffic accidents in the Saudi capital Riyadh were due to drivers jumping red lights, followed by 18 percent of accidents caused by illegal U-turns. The most common dangerous driving activities were speeding, sudden stops and speaking on the phone while driving.

        • Rabbit Balls says:

          Bore off JS.

        • Come Correct says:

          So you’re saying we guys have pure accidents because we’re bored?… Makes sense.

          • Sandy Bottom says:

            You missed the part about “drug use is also a contributing problem”.

            • Come Correct says:

              I know I was just being stupid. As much as I am for marijuana I don’t believe it should be used while performing everyday activities like work and driving. It should be treated like alcohol in that respect but obviously some will abuse it.

              • Sandy Bottom says:

                “some will abuse it”. So you agree that legalising marijuana will add to social problems caused by drug abuse.

                • Come Correct says:

                  Well yes, it will have its own issues that’s why legalizing would have to be very well thought out beforehand. It’s not like two people high on marijuana are going to fight over a girl though but let’s say your driving high while tired, theres a greater chance of falling asleep at the wheel which could potentially kill someone else and possibly yourself. On the flip side look at the social ills due to prohibition, it allows gangs to thrive. Just have to weigh out the pros and cons. I use and I’m actually doing quite well at my new job, that’s because my life doesn’t revolve around it(abuse) and it is not highly addictive contrary to popular belief.

                  • Suzie Quattro says:

                    It is addictive, and it is habit-forming. If made legal it will lead to more poverty and will add to social problems.

                    • Sara says:

                      Where do you get your information that poverty will increase? Because if legalized it would create a new industry and jobs for Bermuda. Not to mention if made legal, you would be able to easily grow yourself so now please explain yourself.

                    • Sara says:

                      Please note pot CAN be mentally addictive. It is impossible for pot to be physically addictive like nicotine, alcohol, and other heavy drugs. Do your research people!

                    • Come Correct says:

                      I’d love to see you put that argument up to the state of California who before medical marijuana was one of the poorest states in the exactly would it increase poverty though? Right now most of the money goes to gangs for them to spend on themselves, if legalized the government could use the revenue as a subsidy to benefit all of the people on this island and not only that but create countless jobs. Like Sara says it can be mentally addictive which is really just a lack of willpower, not physically addictive. You will not have withdrawls if you do not have any, trust me I’ve been there, I was perfectly fine, just didn’t sleep as good. My point was if decriminalized or legalized it should be treated just like alcohol, but how do you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that someone is under the influence when they are behind the wheel. Marijuana stays in your urine for almost a month and I’m not sure how specific hair samples can be.

          • J Starling says:

            Nope, was just adding to what Family Man had said.

            I just thought he raised an interesting point and I thought it would be useful to understand what the cause of the high traffic accident rate in Saudi Arabia was.

  14. Terry says:

    Alcohol has always and will be the money maker.
    It’s legal.
    It has been an and the escape for many in Bermuda for hundreds of years.

    Rock Fever and no ticket out.

  15. Scoalsy says:

    You all keep blaming it on Alcohol only BUT speeding to is the main causes for accidents, and it is not only bikes, cars, trucks, tractor trailers, buses (yes buses) they all just wiz pass me all day long :(
    Where is the Police presents they promised ??????????????????

    Mr. Slow poke here (45 K)

    • Um Jus Sayin says:

      Don’t forget vehicle malfunctions, health related issues, tiredness. Just some other causes.

  16. Stunned says:

    Did we have to wait all of this time to determine that? How much did this study really cost the taxpayers? Now that we know, what is going to be done about it? Are we going to ban the sale of this #1 killer and destroyer of families?

  17. Walter Burgess says:

    The DOH could have saved the public a bundle on this report.Simply drive along the south end of Shelton Road Pembroke and they would have identified numerous beer and miniatures (alcohol) that are abandoned along the road side daily. (I know as I’m out there collecting them from the road side as litter).

    The problem of alcohol is rampant in our community. It has been for decades. And the problem of drink and drive is not new and is always being reflected in the numerous road accidents and no end of private and public property (walls) being destroyed by these same drivers.

    I say no more sale of single beers or these small miniatures, they ultimately end up on the road side as litter and the drivers are consuming while driving, thus being a danger to other road users.

    Just my view

    FWB Jr

    • Triangle Drifter says:

      Stand to be corrected but I can’t think of anywhere offhand in the US or Canada where miniatures & single beers can be bought. Oh, & don’t get caught with an open anything in the vehicle or have anything, even unopened, in front.

      • Tommy Chong says:

        Miniatures & single beers are sold in America & Canada. The big difference between the two countries is that in Canada groceries, corner stores & pharmacies are not allowed to sell any beverages with alcohol. The only place in Canada other than licensed restaurants & bars that can sell alcohol are liquor stores that are regulated by the Liquor Control Board of the providence. In America like Bermuda alcohol can be bought in many types of stores.

        • Triangle Drifter says:

          Thankyou Tommy. My knowledge of the US is far greater than Canada. Tried to buy a 6 pack at an Alabama convenience store one time on a Sunday. The cashier looked at me in horror that I even removed it from the cooler. No alcohol sales on Sunday in THAT county. Next one, a few miles up the road, no problem.

    • Um Jus Sayin says:

      Why drink one, when I can drink six?

  18. godson says:

    And it will soon be sold on Sundays…

  19. Keepin' it Real...4Real! says:

    Ban it….it has not one positive attribute…except making cannabis look much more beneficial…

    • Come Correct says:

      “In vino veritas, in cannabis sanitas”
      By Come Correct

    • Sandy Bottom says:

      Er, no. Adding another way to get high will not make our roads safer.

      • Sara says:

        People already get high and drive. You act like because it is illegal all these things you state that will suddenly happen from legalization will happen. No, it already happens. Open your damn eyes.

        • Suzie Quattro says:

          But making it legal would make it worse. Open your damn eyes.

          • Sara says:

            You state this as fact and you have NO proof that this is true.

  20. Triangle Drifter says:

    Add alcohol to somebody whose driving habits are already poor when sober & ‘bingo’ this should be no surprise.

  21. Nicky Gurret says:

    This information is nothing new. It that been established time and time again. I fail to understand why another study has been done? It is the solutions that need to be studied and acted on that one needs to invest in.
    This is the same with so many issues. It is the solutions that need to be acted on not new studies on the same problem.

    • sigh says:

      These are the latest statistics from ongoing data collection – don’t shoot the messenger

    • Truth is killin' me... says:

      That’s the problem with this island…TOO MUCH TALK AND NOT ENOUGH ACTION BY EVERYBODY INCLUDING POLITICIANS!!!BERMUDA ACTION PARTY (B.A.P.) is who I’m going to vot for, NEXT TIME AROUND!!!!

  22. jake best says:

    but they sell it everywere and its legal,
    people sound like a broken record

  23. jake best says:

    i drive under the infuence of weed every day ,,very high ,,never one accident or even a scratch on the car,,,28 years

    explain that experts

    • Suzie Quattro says:

      You’ve been lucky. Driving drunk or high is absolutely stupid.

      • Come Correct says:

        Have you ever been high on marijuana? If like Sandy you haven’t then how can you even say that? Being high on marijuana is not as serious as the word high makes it sound and nobody has 28 years of luck. In some people marijuana greatly increases their focus and you’re actually more aware of potential hazards, alcohol is the complete opposite. I still don’t feel people should drive under the influence of anything. If you have an accident or worse let it be because of operator error.

  24. Stoner says:

    Alcohols the devil! Decriminalize the herbs! you’ll see ya cousins more often