Unconstitutional but for the better good?

[CHenry]

I agree to that but are you fcked up at .09? According to the law you are but in reality there is no difference between a legal .08 and a .09-.12 as far as likelihood of impairment. It's crap that if you get a couple drinks with dinner that you should have to worry about a 10k plus event in fines and criminal record. The states have a cash cow by having a legal limit but making it so far below the actual threshold for impairment that thousands of not drunk drivers are being prosecuted. If it really were in the name of safety then they would bar any alcohol at all and be done with it. It's very telling how govts approach this issue.

I'm with CHenry on the texting while driving being ignored until they can find a way to make money on it. Haven't looked up the data but I would bet that texting may have already surpassed DUI for collisions.

I agree with you here. I had bought a BA meter for curiosity to see what it took to get me to .08 and I was very surprised at the results. At .08 I felt absolutely 0 impairment.
It wasnt until I reached about double that before I felt even a slight buzz - which was about 4-5 beers IIRC. I think the old fashioned roadside sobriety test should be all it takes. Forget the breathalizer, if someone cant stand on one foot and count at least 25 or cant walk a straight line, they wont pass a .08 breath test. The breath test is just a legal means to make the charges stick and money flow while removing the "opinion" of the LEO which could be easily defeated in court. Its all a scam.

 

[nofearfactor]

I agree with you here. I had bought a BA meter for curiosity to see what it took to get me to .08 and I was very surprised at the results. At .08 I felt absolutely 0 impairment.
It wasnt until I reached about double that before I felt even a slight buzz - which was about 4-5 beers IIRC. I think the old fashioned roadside sobriety test should be all it takes. Forget the breathalizer, if someone cant stand on one foot and count at least 25 or cant walk a straight line, they wont pass a .08 breath test. The breath test is just a legal means to make the charges stick and money flow while removing the "opinion" of the LEO which could be easily defeated in court. Its all a scam.

In 92' I was 23 driving along late at night on my way back home to San Francisco from a gig in Modesto where the rest of my band lived and passed a car with one headlight in Turlock, it turned out to be a cop, who then turned around and sped up lighting me up. I had had a few beers while playing the show but wouldnt have driven if I didnt think I was good to go. Pulled over, we exchanged some dialogue, gave him my legal stuff, he asked if I had been drinking and I said I had just played a gig and nursed a few beers over maybe 3-4 hours, he could see my gear in the back of my Nissan Z. He asked me to get out and we did a few road exercises, that I passed pretty easily. No breathalizer. He was being pretty cool. Told me he was going off shift and wanted to go home. While he said we could go to the breathalizer or even a blood test if I refused because while he did think I had had a few he didnt think I was impaired enough not to drive. BUT. He was gonna write me for the speeding, AND, a ticket for simple public intoxication. NO jail (he could have taken me to jail and made me wait 6 hours before going home he told me), just a couple of tickets. Im not that smart, especially at 3am on a Sunday morning, but wanting to go to a nice warm home with good food and not to jail sounded great. Hey, back then being a rock musician with long hair you just didnt argue with cops, in CA or any where. I felt like I was given a 2nd chance and havent chanced it since. If I was driving to and from gigs or anywhere for that matter then it was no alcohol period.

 

[kd5rjz]

Prepare to have your rights violated this weekend in the following places:

West Siloam Springs Police Department at Cedar and Moseley Road from midnight until 2 a.m.
Big Cabin Police Department at Pine and North Street from midnight until 2 a.m.
Webbers Falls Police Department at South 125th Street and East 153rd Street South from midnight until 3 a.m.
Craig County Sheriff’s Office at Oklahoma 85 and 4475 Road, also 4470 Road and County Road 350, from 7 p.m. until midnight.
Locust Grove Police Department at Cavalier and Ewing, also Oklahoma 82 and 560 Road, from 9:30 p.m. until midnight.
Fort Gibson Police Department will conduct checkpoints on Nov. 25, 26 and 27 at U.S. 62 and Scott Street from 9:30 p.m. until 1 a.m. each night.

 

[CHenry]

Where do you get that info?

 

[vvvvvvv]

The states have a cash cow by having a legal limit but making it so far below the actual threshold for impairment that thousands of not drunk drivers are being prosecuted.

The municipalities are part of the problem. They see it as a nice cash cow and that's why they lobby against requiring DUIs to go to courts of record. As it stands right now, unless you've been picked up by OHP and some Sheriff Departments, the burden is on the arresting officer or their agency to determine if it is your first offense by picking up the phone and calling other municipal police departments. They'd rather you drive with barely a buzz (but above the legal limit) so they can make their revenue and pad their DUI arrest numbers.

 

[henschman]

I agree it is a way overblown issue. Because of groups like MADD, DUI is treated like the crime of all crimes, and it is politically impossible to get the limits raised or penalties lessened.

People frequently ask my advice for what to do if you're stopped for DUI. The answer, of course, is "it depends." As far as the standard field sobriety tests go (walk and turn, stand on one foot, etc.), I think you should always refuse. There is really no way it can help you, whether you're over the limit or not. Cops can always find a way to criticize what you do on one of these tests, or just make it up. the same goes for the horizontal gaze nystagmus test (shining a bright fukcing light in your face and having you follow an object back and forth with your eyes). Cops are not doctors, yet they are allowed by the courts to testify regarding this particular medical phenomena. You are opening yourself up to being the victim of bad science, or them just plain making **** up, by taking this test. No matter what you are just handing them further opportunities to develop evidence and testimony that they will use to hang you by taking these tests.

The breathalyzer is another matter. Sometimes it is a good idea to take the breathalyzer. Basically, if you think you are under the legal limit, you should take it, as they will probably let you go at that point. if you think you are over the limit, you shouldn't take it. Another thing to understand about breathalyzers is that there is a big difference between the portable ones cops carry in their cars, and the big ones down at the station. The portable ones are not admissible as evidence in in court, and you will not have your license suspended if you refuse one of them. The big ones at the station are admissible, and if you refuse, you WILL have your license suspended, and will have the burden of proving to the DPS that you weren't drunk or there wasn't probable cause to think you were in order to get it back. Of course they suspend your license anyway for DUI, which is why I say you don't have much to lose by refusing the test if you think (or know) you are over the limit. By taking the test, you are just handing the cops evidence that makes you easier to convict in that situation. A DUI case based on nothing more than an officer's observations of you is a lot easier to beat than one where they have an over-the-limit breathalyzer reading.

Be aware that if they try to pin a DUI on you, EVERY cop will ALWAYS put in his report (and testify on the witness stand) that you had "red, watery, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, and were unsteady on your feet." It is a good idea to take a picture of yourself either before you drive or as you are getting pulled over to be able to impeach this testimony and discredit the cop as a witness if it comes to that. It is also a lot harder for them to make a case against you based on this kind of stuff if you have witnesses who were with you either at the stop or just before you drove, and will testify that it isn't true.

They can take blood by force if they get a judge to sign a search warrant. They probably won't go this far unless it is a slow night or you jist really pissed them off, but if they decide to do this there isn't much you can do unless you want to have even more violence directed at you as well as further charges. Just be sure you are clear to everyone involved that you do not consent and you are doing this only under threat of violence, so they can't later claim it was a consensual jabbing of your veins if there is a problem with the warrant.

To be clear, you have the right to refuse to take any test except a blood draw pursuant to a warrant. The only one you will suffer any negative legal consequences for refusing is the big breathalyzer at the station.

 

[amcardon]

Or you could just not drive if you've been drinking, then you don't have to worry about any of it!

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

 

[farmerbyron]

Henschman, I heard that if you have a CDL and get a DUI that your license is immediately revoked on the first offense. Even if you are not driving a commercial vehicle at the time. Whereas a regular class D it seems like they let you keep your license. Especially for a first offense. Do you know the specifics?

 

[colb]

Or you could just not drive if you've been drinking, then you don't have to worry about any of it!

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

Not really. I've had friends accused of DUI in the past, without having a single drink. The post before yours outlines the possibilities that can arise from cooperating with the officer, because you know you're innocent.

This is why we have the 4th and 5th amendments. Decline questions, decline searches. Even in situations where you are sober and haven't been drinking, it's your word vs the officers. They can cherry pick what you say during a stop, which can lead to false charges.

Hell, it happened in Guthrie after the Mumford concert. The cop had an axe to grind with the citizen he arrested (illegal arrest) and claimed the guy was drunk, etc.

 

[CHenry]

Or you could just not drive if you've been drinking, then you don't have to worry about any of it!

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

The point of the thread is about cops overreaching the law and our rights. No one here is advising that you drink and drive. Are you okay with the cops stopping you to see if you are breaking any laws? If so can they no knock your door and enter to check for illegal activity? Its the same exact thing, and they are doing both currently.