Dude, Acid and most of the stuff on Rephlex records are two albeit fast, but different styles.

that sucks :/

Meh who needs civil rights. You're a damn liberal if you complain about cops treading all over you to protect you.

maybe he was robo tripping or more like nexium trippin like meth

So if Fark is "not the news," why is there a "news" tab?

\not to threadjack or anything
\\DRTFA
\\\slashies!

A lawyer who defends DUI charges for a living... yeah, that's an objective source.

He said "acid!" heheh. heheheh. heh. heheheh. heheh. heh.

DEATH TO ALL KILLERS!!!!

marktrail: So if Fark is "not the news," why is there a "news" tab?

You shut your damn dirty mouth hippy.

AnthraxRipple: A lawyer who defends DUI charges for a living... yeah, that's an objective source.

You'd think he'd be in favor of harsher DUI laws so he'd have more people to defend wouldn't you.

I'm not sure about where this happened, but here in Edmonton our police officers actually know that you will read high after having one beer if the test is done shortly after consumption. As such, they will generally give you a followup test 15 or so minutes later to see the difference.

Folks, that is not a news story. That is a lot of hot air by an attorney who earns his living by defending his clients against charges of drunk driving.

Delete SCARY tag, substitute UNLIKELY.

Honestly, the current DUI/DWI laws in this country are absurd in many places - mostly because they enforce levels so massively-low that alcohol in concentrations that wouldn't even come close to affecting your driving ability are treated the same as driving while utterly-smashed.

This is because MADD's mission has shifted from "safety" to "attempted prohibition" in order to continue justifying their existence now that all munincipalities have enacted laws against drunk driving (the original goal of the organization).

I've never been drunk, by the way. Most I've ever had in an evening has been two glasses of wine. But I see no reason for the laws to be as oddly-implemented and weirdly-enforced as they are.

Here we have the notorious "DUI exception to the Constitution" again. Strangely, Bryan is not presumed to be innocent as we all thought: almost all state laws legally presume a person is under the influence of alcohol if if the machine's reading is .08% or higher.

Because, obviously, if someone appears to be driving drunk then they should get a court date then continue driving home. What's the worst that could happen?

/Family friend killed by drunk driver

farked already?

surgderm: Folks, that is not a news story. That is a lot of hot air by an attorney who earns his living by defending his clients against charges of drunk driving.


This is exactly right. It appears to be a hypothetical illustrating one of the problems with breath testing instruments. Which isn't actually that much of a problem.

Modern breath testing instruments are designed to detect "mouth alcohol." When they detect a big spike in breath alcohol level, they return an error message and the test has to be re-done (usually after another waiting period during which the subject is observed so that he doesn't ingest anything, vomit or burp).

There are some problems with the various models of instruments, but this ain't one of them.

Belch!!!!

/reaches for his Prevacid

bkennedy Dude, Acid and most of the stuff on Rephlex records are two albeit fast, but different styles.

Awesome.

/this post was bought to you by the letters A, F and X.

MostDudeOfDudes: f someone appears to be driving drunk then they should get a court date then continue driving home.

Thats the problem, he didnt appear to be driving drunk it was a DUI checkpoint and he did fine on the physical tests. Its not like a cop was following him and he was swerving all over the place.

i wanna see a fight btw GCT and mark

by the way dont ever take the breathlyzer

Uh; "Bryan" was stupid to not demand a blood alcohol test.

AnthraxRipple

Agreed. What the hell else is a cop supposed to do if he blows a .12?

Besides, the law doesn't stipulate what type of test you need to submit to; only that you must submit a test when requested. You can choose breath, urine, or blood. If this guy really only had one drink, the first words out of his lawers mouth would have been "get a blood test" once he made his phone call.

Sounds to me like this guy was drunk and this douchebag lawyer is trying to get him off the hook via the Chewbacca defense. Fark em both.

Drakkenmaw

Amen, Keep preachin' brother. People that take things to extremes seems to be the root of a lot of problems.

"Posted by Lawrence Taylor on 02/13/2006 Discuss Trackback [0]"

Lawrence Taylor certainly should know about substance abuse. hehe

/NY Giants fan anyway.

I don't drive drunk. Usually only drink outside the house when having an all-too-rare dinner out these days. But I do have a hiatal hernia and GERD and on nights we do go out, I will often get an encore of dinner - several times - including whatever wine was served, on the way home.

If that is actually what happened here, I can understand the defense. While I make no claims on knowing how the machines read "breath", there would be alcohol taste present, if not actual alcohol.

King_of_the_Cows
Modern breath testing instruments are designed to detect "mouth alcohol." When they detect a big spike in breath alcohol level, they return an error message and the test has to be re-done (usually after another waiting period during which the subject is observed so that he doesn't ingest anything, vomit or burp).

There are some problems with the various models of instruments, but this ain't one of them.

wouldn't that fail safe just catch a problem like burping while blowing into the machine? if you burped before you blew into it the alchohol would already be in your mouth, so when you blow I would think there wouldn't be a spike, but still an inaccurate reading of the blood alchohol level.

I like the one where the guy vomited into the B.A. and they took him to jail for being drunk anyway. Local story. Never got a reading. Never did F.S. tests. Just mad because he broke their toy. They called it Assaulting a police officer. I think they also got him for resisting arrest, you know, because he threw up again on the way to the cop car.

Meh, if some cop is gonna waste my time asking for a breathalyzer, I'm gonna waste his by refusing to take one, and demand to be hauled down wherever they go to take blood tests. If I'm over the limit, by then I may be past it. If I'm not, and the cop is just being a dick, well, it's fully within my rights to be a dick right back. Have fun with the paperwork assclown.

A buddy of mine got pulled over a few blocks from my house. He hadn't had a drink in, ohhhh, 6 hours or so. He was as stone cold sober as one could be. Cop walks up, tells him he needs to take a breathalyzer because the cop smelled "breath alcohol". Buddy blows 3 times, each time, 0.00. Cop looked pissed, told him he could go, and then rode his bumper all the way home waiting for him to do something illegal.

But hey, young adult in a foreign import must equal crime in progress.

MostDudeOfDudes
Because, obviously, if someone appears to be driving drunk then they should get a court date then continue driving home. What's the worst that could happen?

no one says to let them drive home. it's the whole 'guilty before innocent' he's contending

Drakkenmaw I've never been drunk, by the way. Most I've ever had in an evening has been two glasses of wine.

Come on, SC! Live a little!

...ponder this...

If they did not want us driving drunk...why are there parking lots at bars?

I have run across a couple of bars that have breathalyzers sitting in the corner for "entertainment purposes." You pay 75 cents and blow through a straw into the machine, and it will tell you your BAC. I don't know how accurate these machines are, but I ran a few tests on one, which verify what these DUI lawyers have been saying. One night, I drank about 8 beers (over the cource of about 3 hours,) drank a water and waited 20 minutes, and then tried the breathalyzer. I blew .11, which seemed about right. The machine says to wait 10 minutes in between each use, so I gave it some time to cool down, during which, no one else used it. After that, I drank 1 more beer, but this time I only waited 5 minutes to use the machine. This time, I blew .20. Now, if 8 beers got me to .11, I doubt that the one extra would get me to up to .20. Here's the kicker though. At the end of the night I finished up with a total of 11 beers. After I hadn't drank for about a half hour, I decided to try 1 more thing. I have already heard that if you burp, it will increase the reading. So I went over, burped, and then blew in the breathalyzer about 5 seconds later. I blew a .30, which is a lot higher than I should have blown.

My point here is, breathalyzers can get screwed up by mouth alcohol and burping. It's not just lawyer BS.

I had to go to a drug and alcohol class last night for my DWI and it is true that you cna fail a breathalizer because of a antacid. The cops in michigan ask if you have had one before the breathtest.
\thank you governor canook.
\\I now owe 2000 to the state of michigan on top of court fines.

I have acid reflux. I had lunch three hours ago, and I'm still burping. Waiting twenty minutes would not have resulted in a lower reading for this guy.

"DUI sobriety checkpoint on the way home"

Fark the rest of this shiat, That right there is the problem. We should not have such a thing in a "free" country.

/zee papers please

Here in Oklahoma, you lose your liscense for refusing a breath test, then they blood test you. You do not get your liscense back no matter what the test results are.

AnthraxRipple: A lawyer who defends DUI charges for a living... yeah, that's an objective source.

There are some honest lawyers out there who want to control these cops who have nothing better to do than set up a roadblock and accuse innocent people of the crime of being drunk until proven innocent..The fundamentals of law are supposed to apply, but the police think .00% bac is the real law of the land and will accuse and search and innterrorgate you until he gets bored.

Do you think that your relation would of been hit by a drunk driver if the police were out patrolling the bar areas and not concentrating on 800 feet of pavement, while all hell breaks loose around them? Bars have parking lots and no bus service..Why do the police not say anything about that? If a bar were to have a designated driver parking lot, then there would only be 25% of spaces compared to the seating in the bar.

Don't most places allow you to ask for a blood test to be performed?

I would've immediatly asked for the blood test, and probably would've gotten off.

nutkick_42:
same in michigan. But you can refuse one on the street. but as soon as you get taken in. its a 1 month suspension and 6 months restricted. I havent driven in 7 months, and I dont really miss it much.

I wonder why these people just don't demand a blood test I did and one my case twice. Oh and yes I do suffer from acid reflux

Don't most places allow you to ask for a blood test to be performed?

I would've immediatly asked for the blood test, and probably would've gotten off.

Actually, a blood test requires that you be arrested and brought to the station. So that they can perform one.

ImJustaTroll: Actually, a blood test requires that you be arrested and brought to the station. So that they can perform one.

I'd rather be arrested and get off than get charged with a DUI that I didn't commit.

Why not demand a blood test?


Hmmm, I haven't been drinking and if I blow into this tube the cop will let me go (since I haven't been drinking), or he can take me to the police station where I'll sit on a hard bench until they get around to poking me with a needle, drawing some blood, testing it and releasing me just in time to get home at the same time I would usually wake up.

I think I'll blow into a straw instead..... Wait a minute, what do you mean it says I'm drunk??????

MostDudeOfDudes: Because, obviously, if someone appears to be driving drunk then they should get a court date then continue driving home. What's the worst that could happen?

You know, I've been saying the same thing about guns in public places. If someone is carrying a gun in a post office, and they aren't a cop, they are probably going to kill someone. So just arrest them right then, and make them prove they weren't going to hurt anyone. What reason would a person have for carring a weapon out in public. Who cares if they say they have a reason, make them prove it in court. Who needs those amendments and civil liberties anyways.