[Aaron]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '�')��If you refuse a field sobriety test, you enhance the chances that the officer is not going to have probable cause to make the arrest to begin with,” he said. “If I am telling somebody at a cocktail party what you want to do to avoid a DUI, it’s ‘Don’t take the field sobriety test.’ ”

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '�')��If you refuse a field sobriety test, you enhance the chances that the officer is not going to have probable cause to make the arrest to begin with,” he said. “If I am telling somebody at a cocktail party what you want to do to avoid a DUI, it’s ‘Don’t take the field sobriety test.’ ”

[nemo]

I blow, but I don't have much choice in the matter. In this pinko commie nanny state of mine, the police has a right to screen for drunk drivers by doing random sobriety checks with breathalyzer. Refusing to blow means the cops get to draw blod, by force if need be. They also have other pretty draconian drug-enforcement powers, many of which I disagree with on principle, even if my own piss is sqeaky clean.

Over all, I don't care what people put in their bloodstream, be it alcohol or anything else, as long as they don't risk hurting others while doing so - this means drunk driving is a big no-no in my book, and I'm all for enforcing this. I see driving on public roads as a privilege rather than a right, and motoring needs heavy regulation to be as safe as possible for everyone involved. If people were responsible, this wouldn't have to be, but they aren't. Thus there's a need for vehicle safety inspections, speed limits, driver's licences, and yes, sobriety tests. You wanna drive, you gotta blow, and that's fine by me.

[dinopello]

Virginia legistlature recently killed a proposal to make it illegal to have an open container of alcohol in the passanger compartment of the car. I've got no problem with passengers drinking, but it really pisses me off that Virginia also has a law that you can't walk down the street drinking a beer.

For drivers though, I agree that impaired driving needs to be regulated. They give out and maintain peoples driver's licenses all too easy.

[Aaron]

I think the lawyer is saying that consenting to field sobriety tests or Breathalyzer tests does nothing but provide more evidence to prosecute you with.

When the guys who decide probable cause to give these tests, are the same one's who administer the test, evaluate the results, & hold this evidence to prosecutes you... with a large financial incentive tied to it...

We call that the "fox guarding the hen-house".

My lawyer gave the same advice... don't blow... even if you are sober.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'R')efusing to blow means the cops get to draw blod, by force if need be.

[AlCzervik]

Pretty sure if you don't blow in Michigan it's an automatic license revocation for six months. Might be better than a DUI on your record, but blowing into the machine might be a better shot if you want to be able to drive.

[Aaron]

Here's a contemporary example of the difficulty with this thinking.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')o test another theory, Dr Walker donned a long wig to see whether there was any difference in passing distance when drivers thought they were overtaking what appeared to be a female cyclist.

While wearing the wig, drivers gave him an average of 14cm more space when passing.

[dinopello]

I think it would be much less of a problem if licenses were not issued so easily and they were revoked much more easily. If you are at fault in an accident - automatic 1 year suspension, if you kill someone - banned for life from driving, speeding - 1 month etc .

I know we don't do this in the US because Driving=Living for most people.

edit:
Just saw this, its not on the subject of sobriety, but it is funny and relates to goverment regulation and driving - and legislatures wasting time on idiotic stuff while the country goes to hell.

No Balls on the Road

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '"')People are making a joke out of it," Myers said yesterday. "But I think it's a pretty serious problem. You have body parts hanging from the hitches of cars. We've crossed a line."

[smallpoxgirl]

Seems the issue with whether to blow comes down to how sure you are that you're over. If you refuse to blow, you're loosing your license for a year. I don't know about where you live, but around here, I bet there's a lot of people that would rather do two days in jail than to do a year without a license. So yeah, if you're sure you're over, then refusing to blow might benefit you. If you refuse to blow and you're under then you loose your license unnecessarily. If you refuse to blow and you're over, they can still test you. They just have to go to the trouble of getting a court order.

Seems to me a bit of a pedantic argument. Clearly the smartest and safest answer is to not get all liquored up and go for a drive. Is it a slippery slope? Probably, but it seems to me that its an unavoidable one. We are packed far to densely to have anything resembling freedom. One stupid reckless act by someone can devastate too many other lives. The nanny state is the inevitable result of overpopulation. It's not going to get anything but worse.

[Kingcoal]

I'm with Aaron the whole way. I don't condone operating a motor vehicle while compromised in any fashion, which includes tiredness, drunk, high, while blabbering on a cell phone, etc.

However, in the USA you have a right to remain silent and not incriminate yourself. You have protection against illegal search and seizure (forced blood test), which under the constitution needs to be ordered by a judge, not at the whim of a police officer or other official.

Refusing to participate in a field sobriety test is claiming your right to remain silent. I believe they make the "forced blood test" possible by giving you a choice: "Sir you can either do a field test here or we can take you to the hospital and have some blood drawn?" You are being asked a question and most people don't realize that they have a third choice, which is neither and that must be communicated to the officer very clearly. It's a trick that lawmakers use to get you to consent. Then they can make laws that say that once you've consented, you can't bag out, clever.

When you are asked if you were drinking the correct answer is "I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that I may incriminate myself." The officer says, "sir, will you please get out of the car," the correct response is to get out of the car and put your keys on the roof of the car, stay out of traffic and don’t stagger. The only thing you have to do at this point is get into the police car if the officer asks you to. Every other request should be answered with the 5th amendment answer.

The police have a right to stop you and you must stop, they have a right to demand you exit the vehicle and you must do so and they have the right to arrest you and you must comply. Other than that, everything else is optional and as the article points out, is nothing more than self incrimination. Take the license suspension; you don’t want a criminal record which is what you will have if you are convicted of DUI.

[nemo]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')This whole idea that my blood chemistry is a government owned, public domain environment is offensive.

Not because I want to protect drunks... but where does it end?

[holmes]

I will not blow.

[smallpoxgirl]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Kingcoal', 'R')efusing to participate in a field sobriety test is claiming your right to remain silent. I believe they make the "forced blood test" possible by giving you a choice: "Sir you can either do a field test here or we can take you to the hospital and have some blood drawn?" You are being asked a question and most people don't realize that they have a third choice, which is neither and that must be communicated to the officer very clearly. It's a trick that lawmakers use to get you to consent. Then they can make laws that say that once you've consented, you can't bag out, clever.

[Aaron]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Kingcoal', 'R')efusing to participate in a field sobriety test is claiming your right to remain silent. I believe they make the "forced blood test" possible by giving you a choice: "Sir you can either do a field test here or we can take you to the hospital and have some blood drawn?" You are being asked a question and most people don't realize that they have a third choice, which is neither and that must be communicated to the officer very clearly. It's a trick that lawmakers use to get you to consent. Then they can make laws that say that once you've consented, you can't bag out, clever.

[Kingcoal]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', 'I')'m not sure if you're trying to make a legal arguement or a philospophical one. I think your wrong on both counts. Talk about slippery slopes. If drivers shouldn't be able to be compelled to provide alcohol test samples, then who should?

[dinopello]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Shannymara', 'T')hey determined where to put traffic lights based on the number of accidents and fatalities and there hadn't been enough.

[dinopello]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Kingcoal', ' ')I am against driving drunk and I stated that. I’m assuming that you don’t ever drink and drive, Smallpoxgirl. I don’t either.

[NEOPO]

Its a slippery slope indeed and we should all say NO on principle alone.

Heck just imagine how many prescription drug impaired people are on the roads.

I would personally take part in some new testing to see exactly what Impaired means.
It would be my pleasure to toke it up and then drive circles around the drunks and the prescription druggies

"Andretti has never raced me but oh I'm ready, ready"

[NEOPO]

It became mandatory in "some" jurisdictions because the sheeple went along with it so willingly.
Two wrongs dont make a right

[basil_hayden]

Drunk driving became no fun around the same time there were too many cars on the road to hit, somewhere around 1985 I'd say.

Holmes told me don't blow, he sucks. LOL j/k my ponzi warrior!

No smoking in a bar is a pisser too, I just don't leave the house anymore.

BTW, don't answer the door when they come knocking either.