Random breath tests!

Paradigm

An interesting take on checkpoints....

What the police would typically do is to set up a checkpoint, and then stop vehicles at their discretion - which they are perfectly entitled to do. They will then ask the driver whether he has been drinking. If he says "yes", or "just the one", then they have grounds for suspicion and will administer a breath test. If he says "no", the police officer replies "then you won't have any objections to taking a breath test, will you Sir?" While the driver is entitled to refuse, most people - particularly if they were confident they had nothing to fear - would decide that discretion was the better part of valour, and accede to the test. Few people want to be branded as a troublemaker in the eyes of the police. This is pushing the existing powers beyond where they were intended to go, but has now become a widely-used tactic.

It doesn't spell out the consequences after refusing though.

Taken from http://www.80mg.org.uk/ddlaw.html

Sgt_Pepper_2

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Agreed, but that's exactly where the question of whether or not refusing a polite request for a voluntary test would be enough to legally form the required suspicion.

I don't believe it would but a magistrates' court on a Monday morning might easily convict anyway. Taken to appeal I doubt that a judge would uphold that conviction because doing so would make a nonsense of your right to refuse and effectively extend police powers beyond what Parliament granted.

There is no legislation to cover any form of voluntary breath test and it is for this reason they are not conducted. It therefore cannot lead to a suspicion of alcohol if it is met with a refusal.

mcjordi

well im all for random breath tests.. if your not over the limit or had a skin full then theres nowt to worry about..

ive been breathalised twice once when i clipped the kurb after passing my test on 2 days prior and once when i was out picking up mates at 2am on a saturday evening and they were !!!!ed as newts. i dont drink and drive so am pro breath tests..
only reason i can see for anyone to refuse a breath test is if they have something to hide

Paradigm

mcjordi wrote: »

well im all for random breath tests.. if your not over the limit or had a skin full then theres nowt to worry about..
only reason i can see for anyone to refuse a breath test is if they have something to hide

I don't drink so I've nothing to hide but I would seriously consider refusing (as is my right) a voluntary test at a check point.

This "if you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to worry about" sentiment is gradually chipping away at our rights.

Joe_Horner

Sgt_Pepper wrote: »

There is no legislation to cover any form of voluntary breath test and it is for this reason they are not conducted. It therefore cannot lead to a suspicion of alcohol if it is met with a refusal.

They most certainly are conducted, at least around here. Both me and my partner have been "asked if we'd mind" during the local annual Christmas campaign. Random stops (perfectly legal) and no suspicion once stopped, but "would we mind taking one" because the campaign is all about highlighting the risks. Remember, whether or not they have a "power" to ask, there's also nothing in law prohibiting them from doing so.

Both of us were perfectly happy to oblige but the question raised was whether a polite refusal could be seen by the officer as raising enough suspicion to then require you to take one anyway (on the popular "if you've got nothing to hide" basis). I don't believe it would but I suspect that many policemen on the ground might feel it did.

In which case the courts would have to decide whether or not refusal of a voluntary request could legally create suspicion in the absence of any prior suspicion. Their view on that would determine the outcome of a failure to provide charge in those circumstances.

anotherbaldrick

In Sussex they have always had random breath tests, just that they carry them out under the pretext of "Checking your car for defects sir, oh ! have you had a drink today ?"

Honeydog

Paradigm wrote: »

I don't drink so I've nothing to hide but I would seriously consider refusing (as is my right) a voluntary test at a check point.

This "if you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to worry about" sentiment is gradually chipping away at our rights.

That will possibly be your right

• for you or your family member to be mown down by a drunk driver while walking on the pavement.
• to have your - legally parked on the road - car clipped or smashed into by a drunk driver.
• to be involved in an RTC because the other party just had a few too many before getting in their car to drive home.

The more of these idiots who are caught by any means the better. Same with texters. I'd take their licences away for good.

zagfles

spugzbunny wrote: »

Can we say that in the UK? Does everyone you know never have a drink before driving? I can honestly say on an average works drink night there's always at least 1 or 2 who have had 2, 3 or 4 pints then driven home.

And they are probably well within the limit. The ones who are much more likely to be over the limit are those who have a skinful and then drive the next day.

Trebor16

Honeydog wrote: »

If someone hasn't been drinking then I don't see why they would refuse to take a breath test. It only take a couple of minutes and you get a souvenir mouthpiece!

Sometimes the attitude a person has when stopped dictates the next course of action.

If there are no grounds to require a breath test then why should a person provide one?

Paradigm

Honeydog wrote: »

That will possibly be your right

• for you or your family member to be mown down by a drunk driver while walking on the pavement.
• to have your - legally parked on the road - car clipped or smashed into by a drunk driver.
• to be involved in an RTC because the other party just had a few too many before getting in their car to drive home.

The more of these idiots who are caught by any means the better. Same with texters. I'd take their licences away for good.

Can we now spread this "by any means" to all crime?

Drugs & dealers are a blight on our society so how about random house searches? No matter if there's any evidence or suspicion, the Police will just wake you @ 5:00am & turn your house upside down "just in case"! After all, if you've nothing to hide etc etc you won't have a problem.

Laws are there for the protection of everyone & once the laws are allowed to be bent then it's a slippery slope, be careful what you wish for.