Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew?

Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

SugarMyChurro -> Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew? (3/4/2008 4:15:29 PM)
A quick read of the blog located here suggests that the methods used by the police to gain DUI/DWI convictions are highly suspect: http://www.duiblog.com/2007/09/04/secret-breathalyzer-software-finally-revealed/ I just thought others might like to know. What bothers me is the government's focus on ordinary citizens just going about their daily lives and how the county or state can distrain more money from them. To me this is a major civil rights issue, and not anything to do with drinking and driving and getting away with it per se. Don't be an asshole by driving while intoxicated. But don't let the police bully you into coughing up money you don't owe either.

Sinergy -> RE: Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew? (3/4/2008 4:27:07 PM)
The breathalyzer is promoted by the police officers because the other alternative they could use, a blood test, must be performed in a medical office by trained personnel and tested to exacting standards by medical professionals. Asking for a blood test forces them to have you lock up your car and transport you to the hospital to have it done, allowing the individual to sober up and using up several hours of the officer's time. Most people go "Im not really drunk (or I have not had anything to drink) and I dont want to waste 2 hours of my life being driven to the hospital" and agree to the breathalyzer. As the article points out, the software in these systems is not made to exacting standards, nor do they have to use any sort of calibration of their equipment prior to their shift, your test, or whatever. Sinergy

Termyn8or -> RE: Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew? (3/4/2008 9:31:19 PM)
A breathalyzer never has, nor ever can be accurate. There are reasons for this. First of all they lie, not the breatalyzer, but the people who promote and use it. They come out and say that your liver processes 1 ounce of alcohol per hours. Perhaps that is the average, but they don't even admit to "between 0.8 and 1.2 per hour". And I think there is even a wider range than that. Also, they assume that everyone's body dissipates the alcohol through respiratory means in the same ratio as everyone else as opposed to what is discarded in urine and sweat. This is plain bad science here, and it is no surprise that bad software backs it up. But you do have a shot in the dark. You can subpeona the actual machine used on your test in court along with a qualified operator. Your defense attorney then has the operator, who is under oath that they have not drank any alcohol today, to blow into the machine. I have heard of this working more than once. If the operator blows anything other than a 000 you get off, even if you were guilty, unless they have tape of you staggering around. And do not fool yourself, getting a jury is not always the thing to do. You always put in the demand for a jury trial, but if you are guilty you always use it as a concession. I can tell you from firsthand experience how fair the system is. Younger days, I smashed my van twice within about a week, drunk both times. I am not proud, but I say this to illustrate a point and because I personally know it to be true. This lawyer, you could just about run over the President of the US and this would get you three days. I copped DUIs both times. I took the first one, community service and a fine. Other one was a bit bigger fine but reduced to a lesser charge. Therefore I had only one DUI, he told me "Two and you got twelve points". He got it reduced because at twelve you lose your license. Oh yes, I still had one. But only ten points. But back then being someone who should be fucking locked up instead of driving around, I managed to get a two point speeding ticket. That took care of that for a while. You can beat a radar ticket the same way, just have a qualified operator point it across the room and show the reading. There are even more ways to fight a speeding ticket, but that is not the subject now. But I mean ways you keep legal, no mumbo jumbo. But really people should not have to play these games. They treat a guy who had two beers on the way home from work like someone who just killed a busload of nuns. That's our world. Tolerance tolerance tolerance, all the sudden zero tolerance. Not for the nun killers, for everyone. But then you see by helping destroy small businesses they reaped another benefit, the demise of the local bars. Now you have to drive. While back you could walk, have a quaff or three and possibly meet some of your neighbors. Not no more. Don't have much more to say unless you want to get into alot more than this. Not today. T

popeye1250 -> RE: Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew? (3/4/2008 9:43:36 PM)
I always got a kick out of "Lie detectors." If they really worked why not a "Truth detector?" I wonder where they keep those lie detectors, next to the ouije boards or the tarrot cards?

SugarMyChurro -> RE: Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew? (3/4/2008 9:51:56 PM)
Termyn8or: I think the point is that the device is shit and cannot be trusted to begin with. Why act as if you accept the evidence from it in any way? Just talking strategy-wise: it sounds like one should do the breathalyzer and then have the evidence tossed out. In other words, don't balk at the scene of the DUI/DWI and insist on the blood test. Let them gather evidence in their own idiotic way. Let them have their day. In court you trump it all with good lawyering and a programming expert.

slaveboyforyou -> RE: Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew? (3/4/2008 10:08:16 PM)
Well I don't know how it is everywhere else, but it's a crime to refuse to submit. They usually have you go through a field sobriety test. If you fail that, they take you in to the station for a breathalyzer. Now you can ask for a blood test, but only after you have submitted to the breathylizer. What pisses me off here is that even you blow below a .08, they will still keep you in jail for 6 hours on a public intoxication charge. That's a perfect example of cops being wrong, but using a bullshit charge to keep some of their precious pride and the delusion of their own infallibility.

SugarMyChurro -> RE: Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew? (3/4/2008 10:30:42 PM)
I'd say another strategy in a case like that would be to claim a personal religious refusal to allow them to sample your blood. FWIW, and IANAL, but the reason you have to submit is that it's probably a condition of having the license. Effectively, it's a contractual agreement to submit to tests on demand. See? That's one of my concerns - losing one's civil rights just to travel. I want to drive a car because it's how we all get around. Why should they get a contractual end-run around my rights just so that I can do so? What they are doing is taking you from a common law legal forum to an admiralty one. Then it's not really an issue of rights, but of how you are performing according to prescribed regulations.

Smith117 -> RE: Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew? (3/4/2008 10:31:44 PM)
Personally, I've never cared about those tests. I don't drink much and when I do, either I'm at home with zero plans to go anywhere or I ride with others. If I am going out and intend to drink, my car stays in my garage. If my friends don't want to drive, then we better get a ride somewhere because the same hand that touches an alcohol-filled drink does NOT touch my car key, except to move it out of the way so I can get to my house key. Honestly, percentages...processing...I've never really cared. I, unlike so many drunk-driving morons, choose to err on the side of caution. Might be "over" cautious, but it also means I have zero chance of getting a DUI. Ever.

Termyn8or -> RE: Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew? (3/4/2008 11:09:10 PM)
SBFY, yes the courts seem to be of the opinion now that if you are behind the wheel of a vehicle you have no rights whatsoever. And a public intox charge ? What are they saying that you are a danger to yourself or others but are OK to drive ? I am not questioning what you said, I am just saying, does everyone else see how this makes perfect sense ? Legally of course. That is how topsy-turvy the law has gotten here. Sug, yes, soon it will become a seperate charge just for refusing the test everywhere. The measure failed in Ohio last time around but they'll keep bringing it up until it passes. Therefore your conclusion is correct, IMO of course. Take the test and discredit the machine. But boil it down here. Almost everyone here has drank and drove. Some who never drank and really did just have one. Some drove to a local bar for lunch, had a couple with their food, drove back to work and in some cases operated heavy machinery. Years go by and nothing happens, the shop has an excellent safety record and is paying the low scale on the worker's comp. You know they do jack up their rates when something happens. All drugs drugs drugs, alcohol among them of course. It is a matter of degree. I know people who would trust me with young kids, go out, but make sure I had a twelve pack. They knew I would not go wild, and at night the kids are not going out so I do not have to deal with that. A twelve doesn't get me drunk, plus the fact it would not be all gone when they got home anyway. These DUI laws are all part of what is called a knee jerk reaction. And in the end, you want to know the result ? This is hypothetical but hear it out, you go to the bar. Take a carful of people. When it is time to leave you one buddy has only had two beers and you ask him to drive back to town. He says "No, I don't need a DUI", so you wind up driving and you really shouldn't have. You crack up the car killing all of you. Could happen. what people do not realize it that the law is a very powerful force, it can do good in the right hands, but then we got what we got. T

Aneirin -> RE: Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew? (3/5/2008 12:11:25 AM)
An interesting point about any 'measuring' device the police use. If it is used to measure and there possibly affect the freedom of an individual, then it must be a calibrated device. Advice from a friendly policeman over here is when you get 'pulled' by either a breathalyzer or speed trap device, always demand the serial number of the machine. The reason for this is police authorities often either forget or ignore the date of recalibration. A device used to test you could very well be out of calibration and therefore suspect, hardly the accurate measuring device. Also, it is known for policemen to be not so careful with these machines, they get chucked about, even the hand held speed monitors often end up thrown in the car boot(trunk). The point being any measuring device that is subjected to shock can upset the calibration. So always demand the serial number of the testing device, when it comes to prosecution, demand the calibration certificate, if it is out of calibration, then how can it be trusted to give a true reading. Calibration is often looked at as an unecessary expense by many police authorities, which renders a machine out of service when it has to go for calibration, and the recal date is often forgotten. Just a point, if you are slaughtered on booze and driving, then there is no excuse, but people here have had a reading for eating xmas pudding with brandy custard.

Sinergy -> RE: Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew? (3/5/2008 8:22:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or These DUI laws are all part of what is called a knee jerk reaction. I had a weekend job one time when I was 16 where they had me drink alcohol (perscribed amounts) and drive a simulator in order to determine the effect of alcohol on a teenager's ability to drive. One drink was cool. But the test subject's ability to avoid obstacles, cars pulling out of driveways, or other things that needed to avoid plummetted after that first drink. I saw the results of the study. Conversly, the perception on the part of the person about their driving skill was that it improved with each drink they had (up to about 3) before they started to think that maybe they had had too much to drink. Say what you want about being able to drive with a 12-pack under your belt, but when something happens that requires the use of quick decision making and reflexes, your ability to cope with it degrades significantly after that first drink. Sinergy edited to mention that I will have a glass of wine with dinner and then drive home from the restaurant, but my hard limit is 2 glasses in a 2 hour period.

Termyn8or -> RE: Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew? (3/5/2008 8:35:43 AM)
They had you drinking alcohol at 16 ? I thought that was illegal. T

kdsub -> RE: Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew? (3/5/2008 8:39:56 AM)
Where are the test results... why take the word of a blog... who the heck is he... Between a field test... onboard video and breathalyzer they get it right... no need to nit pick procedures. Butch

Sinergy -> RE: Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew? (3/5/2008 8:46:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or They had you drinking alcohol at 16 ? I thought that was illegal. T It is pretty amazing what one can get away with as a company doing government mandated studies. I was only 16, my parents signed the release forms, I didnt drive home. Sinergy

Termyn8or -> RE: Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew? (3/5/2008 10:40:53 AM)
"I think the point is that the device is shit and cannot be trusted to begin with. Why act as if you accept the evidence from it in any way? " The idea of that is to let the machine contradict itself. The court is not going to summarily dismiss the data (if you can call it that) from the machine. That is the key to beating it. In this case the machine is pretty much a witness, and if it reads alcohol on someone who did not drink you raise the question 'was it lying then or is it lying now ?' just like with any other witness. Once it's credibility is destroyed all they have is physical evidence, like the tape of you doing the field test and your actions at the station. If you were coherent and did not trip over anything, stagger all this, you can beat it. And they know it. My last DUI was in 2004 and I may have been legally under the influence, but I handled it right and even with the tapes they had no problem reducing the charge. I did refuse the test, but that has not yet been outlawed in Ohio. They gave me a no pointer but they fined me $900. As much as I handle these things my own way, sometimes I can't help but thinking that if I was drunk I belonged in jail, but if I wasn't drunk they should have left me alone. True justice doesn't mean much these days I guess. It's all about money. T

DesFIP -> RE: Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew? (3/5/2008 10:55:14 AM)
You always have the right to ask when it was last calibrated. No machine can go forever without adjustment. But every police department around here has all of their recalibrated every six months on average. Meaning this rant is pretty much beating a dead horse. Now certainly, when they first came out, departments didn't get them recalibrated and the results could be wrong but I haven't heard of that happening for years.

SugarMyChurro -> RE: Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew? (3/5/2008 11:02:24 AM)
It's clear that people still drink and drive. What will they do? Increase the fines? Make life impossible for the rest of us who barely drink if at all? It's absolutely about the money. Same as parking tickets.

Aneirin -> RE: Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew? (3/5/2008 11:14:21 AM)
Here's a good one, crush the vehicle.Wanton destruction of someone's pride and joy squashed before their eyes. And to add the vehicle's insurance will be invalid as the owner caused the damage themselves by breaking the law and endangering people.

soul2share -> RE: Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew? (3/5/2008 12:29:13 PM)
Our department calibrates the brethalyzer one a month, as do the departments I have worked for in the past. Breathalyzers are now kept in a stationary place, secured to a counter to avouid being damaged. I have yet to work for a department whose machine is run by software, so I don't know how they are handled. Even our PBT's are left in the briefing room, cased, until they are needed on the street. Also to avoid damaging them....the equipment is expensive, both to buy and repair. Contrary to what it seems is presented, departments take care of this equipment, precisely because of the fine, upstanding citizens that "demand" records. But hey, subpeonas are a dime a dozen, which is what is needed to get those records.....Laywers, however, will charge you an arm and a lef for the same subpoena. Here in AZ, officers DO take people to get a blood test....they are done at either the local hospitals, or by the departments own certified phlebotomist. The states I have worked, and driven in, all have refusal laws. Driving is a privelege, not something guaranteed by any right, civil or not. There are people all over the country who have never had a license, yet their privelges are suspended or revoked, because they have already violated traffic laws on the books. Ulitmately, getting busted for DUI isn't an issue of software, equipment, conspiracy, dui sweep or any other excuse drivers give.....it is an issue of responsibility. I have NO sympathy for anyone who gets caught. I have seen first hand the aftermath of someone who thought "I only had a few", got in their car and then proceeded to wipe out entire families.....and walk away. Repeat offenders abound, and this is while they already have a suspended/revoked license for DUI. Of course, the blog is written by a laywer, so I wonder how much first hand knowledge he has of the machinery or even the software involved. It's simple to write a brief, or cite facts you get from others. For those drivers smart enough to know when they've had too much and decide not to drive, thank you. For those of you who don't, I can only hope getting arrested for DUI is the worst thing that happens.....I couldn't live with the knowledge that I've killed someone by my own hand, and own selfish stupidity.

SugarMyChurro -> RE: Breathalyzer not accurate? Who knew? (3/5/2008 12:44:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: soul2share I have yet to work for a department whose machine is run by software... [8\|] Tick, tick, tick... Please, tell me you're kidding.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875