Police Stops - Festive Drink Drive Campaign

N9eav

DaveMacD wrote: »

If you barely even see a traffic cop, never mind see them trying to enforce these laws, it's little wonder that some knuckleheads think they can get blootered and then drive home.

True, there are not enough to go around especially when we have alcohol related domestic assaults, drunk teenagers, drunken fights, drunken damage, drunk and incapable, thefts of booze... Hmmmmm common theme here?:rolleyes:


No wonder they don't have time to go catch 'real criminals'

atrixblue.-MFR-.

they should make cars of today with built in breatholisers pass the breatholiser then car starts dont pass you walk!

rev_henry

atrixblue.-MFR-. wrote: »

they should make cars of today with built in breatholisers pass the breatholiser then car starts dont pass you walk!

In some parts of the USA courts have these fitted to known drink drivers' cars. They require a breath test before the car will start, and also require them at random intervals whilst driving along. If you don't provide or fail, the car lets you pull over before cutting out. I saw it on Police Camera Action a few years ago. Before it was pulled because, incidentally, the presenter was caught drink driving twice.

sebdangerfield

Lyon's Intoxylizer 3000 suggest 20 mins. Obviously this is the part of the station test procedure rather than the roadside procedure. I used that example to keep things more simple.

sebdangerfield

Officer_Dibble wrote: »

You're showing your age now 3000 was replaced the 6000 about 10 years ago.
All station procedures work on 20 minutes, because that's what it states on the MGDD/A.

Grand old age of 28! I'm going on when the guidelines were brought in.

sebdangerfield

Nope. Never even seen a 6000 or the new portable 7 and 8000s for that matter.

I did cross examine a reserch scientist from Lion regarding the effects of the Tyndall effect after airbag actuation and also endogenous production of brewers whilst being tested by the 6000 at Birmingham Crown once though.

Leebobs

I'm very surprised by the number of comments on this thread... I didn't know it was such a live issue (as opposed to just me being an old fart)!!!

meanastheycome

Anyone who drinks and drives is an irresponsible idiot and should when caught lose their license for LIFE
Anyone who kills another pedestrian/driver whilst under the influence whilst driving should go to prison for LIFE
I applaud the police for their campaigns to stop anyone at any time of year
each drunk or uninsured driver off the road makes it safer for the rest of us law abiding types. Dont Drink & Drive. If you do and get caught you deserve all you get.

DaveMacD

If any proof were needed, get to an amusement arcade after a few beers and try completing a few driving or flying games. If you can't play a computer game well, how the hell can you expect to drive a real car?

derrick

Back on track and from the OP;-
"I have seen a number of "random checkpoints" set up during the festive period, but I am under the impression that a Police Officer can only require you to give a sample if they reasonably believe that you have exceeded the limit or you have committed any other motoring offence.

So how can such "random" tests be justified?!?"

They can't, the police are acting outside and above their authority and the law!


From LAW on the WEB: -

So does that mean that the police can just stop your car if you are driving along and insist on giving you a roadside breath test? The answer is NO. They are entitled to randomly stop your car, but they can only insist on a breath test if they have reasonable cause to suspect you have committed a traffic offence, or have consumed alcohol (eg they can smell it on your breath), or they reasonably believe you have been involved in an accident (eg the description of your car matches that given by a witness).


From post #2; -
"For the police to be able to require a breath test, a driver must have either:

(a) committed a moving traffic offence, e.g. speeding, failing to observe a stop sign, having a defective light etc.,
(b) have been involved in an accident to which the police were called, or
(c) have given the police grounds to suspect they had consumed alcohol above the legal limit, e.g. by driving erratically or walking unsteadily before getting into the car. It is questionable whether the mere fact of having driven out of a pub car park constitutes reasonable grounds for suspicion "

Round here they have been doing them for the past 3-4 years, my BIL was pulled 2 years ago and all they asked was "have you been drinking", (answer was no), "then blow into this, a refusal will result in arrest". No mention about was he the owner,or ask for any documents, or even if he owned the car, just a blatant "random test" meaning the police themselves showing utter contempt and disregard of the law as it is!
Now this is a "random breath test, (not allowed in this country)!

Now I am against DD, but until the law is changed to allow random testing, the police should obey the law that is in force and not make up their own "rules" to get around it, if they want us to obey the law, then then should do so also.