Random breath tests!

Trebor16

derrick wrote: »

"I'm glad you've cleared that up, it's quite clear you definitely don't have an issue with the Police."

You really have a problem in that you think everyone lies,, go and take your meds.

When you resort to personal comments you demonstrate that your own argument has run out of steam, not that it was much of an argument in the first place.

Honeydog

Why would anyone who doesn't drink and drive object to being stopped. I've not been stopped for a breath test (or anything else) in 40 years of driving cars and bikes. But then I don't speed or drive erratically and I have tax and insurance and my car/bike is well maintained and (in the case of the car) loaded appropriately and I wear my seat belt so they have no reason to stop me.

You only have to worry if you aren't as angelic as me.

Honeydog

coinxoperated wrote: »

I was under the impression that they use the 'checking for insurance, tax MOT's etc' as the loop hole to allow them to get close enough to say that they have smelt alchohol on your breath?

Either way, if your legal and don't drink and drive, you shouldn't be worried. I've been stopped a couple of times, gave them details as asked and was off in about 4 minutes. No biggy!

They can do that without stopping you. They just drive behind you and do a moving vehicle PNC check.

Trebor16

Honeydog wrote: »

They can do that without stopping you. They just drive behind you and do a moving vehicle PNC check.

The PNC check will tell them who the registered keeper and if there is an insurance policy in relation to the vehicle (and if the MOT is current). It won't tell them who is driving the car at that precise moment in time so they would still need to stop the car to establish that.

boyse7en

Honeydog wrote: »

Why would anyone who doesn't drink and drive object to being stopped. I've not been stopped for a breath test (or anything else) in 40 years of driving cars and bikes. But then I don't speed or drive erratically and I have tax and insurance and my car/bike is well maintained and (in the case of the car) loaded appropriately and I wear my seat belt so they have no reason to stop me.

You only have to worry if you aren't as angelic as me.

It would be nice to think that, but I used to get stopped regularly driving home around 1-2am on Saturday mornings by bored traffic cops with nothing better to do than ask where I had been, where was I going, had I been drinking etc. etc. and be asked to "produce documents" at the Police station.
After I was stopped three times on the same night within 5 miles I got fed up and went to the Police station to complain and never got stopped again.
I estimate I was stopped around 20 times in a six month period, simply for being a young driver out in the early hours. I never had a single drink before driving, wasn't speeding, driving erratically or anything. Car was taxed, MOT'd and insured. I just caught their eye and they thought they would pull me over.

thenudeone

Joe_Horner wrote: »

The thing is, the law DOES allow them to do what they're doing:

(1) They can stop without reason

Agreed

Joe_Horner wrote: »

(2) Having stopped, they can require a breath test if they have suspicion

Agreed, or if the driver has committed a moving traffic offence.

Joe_Horner wrote: »

(3) Even without suspicion, they can still ask you if you'd mind voluntarily blowing into the bag.

Very Questionable. A "voluntary" breath test (i.e. carried out WITHOUT demonstrating a legal power) probably wouldn't even get past the custody sergeant when booking in.
If there were no legal grounds to require a breath specimen, it just wouldn't be done, because everyone knows that evidence gained in this way would almost certainly be inadmissible in court.

There are plenty of drivers out there who 1) smell of drink or 2) drive erratically or 3) have vehicle defects, no seat belt, or exceed the speed limit; all of which give a legal power to require a breath test. There's no need to ask anyone who doesn't fit these categories for a "voluntary" test.

SailorSam

I'm all in favour of spot checks, if you've not done anything wrong why worry.
When i worked nights on the Cab i was pulled over quite a few times after i'd finished and on my way home. The police would see a fella driving a sporty looking car in the early hours and want to know where you've been, at that time of night you could have well been drinking' I always use to think if my car had been stolen i would have wanted the police to stop it.

Obukit

thenudeone wrote: »

Agreed
There are plenty of drivers out there who 1) smell of drink or 2) drive erratically or 3) have vehicle defects, no seat belt, or exceed the speed limit; all of which give a legal power to require a breath test. There's no need to ask anyone who doesn't fit these categories for a "voluntary" test.

I think the point of "checkpoint" style breath tests is more to deter people from drink driving in the first place rather than to actually catch many drink drivers - a lot of people sadly would drink drive if it wasn't for the chance of being caught.

marleyboy

I have no problem with random breath tests. I would happily pull over and spend a couple of minutes blowing into a tube for the Police, if it means the potential of catching those incapable of driving through drink get either caught out or put off drink\driving in the first place.

I dont know my limit of alcohol intake should I be tempted to have a little glass of wine before driving a car, so opt to have NIL alcohol instead.

If an officer suspects a driver has been drinking, they should not need an excuse to pull them over and test them. If an officer can search someone on the street based on a suspicion, I don't see why they cannot pull over a driver on suspicion.

If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about.

richard734

Ahh, back to the days when I was a PC (20 years ago!) we used to pull drivers for routine docs checks all the time. However we often noticed that, particularaly at night, the drivers eyes would have tiny pupils, and therfore had a suspision that they had been drinking...

Of course shining a blooming great maglite in their face might have had something to do with it!

Do you know what? I dont have a problem with it, either having done it or being a 'victim' of it.

I would rather annoy 10o people for 5 minutes to catch one Drink Driver than deal with another dead body casued by a drunken idiot in a car