489
Field sobriety tests are about as accurate as Tarot readings.
In most jurisdictions, the police can arrest you for refusing. Some experts say that if you're sober, it's better to refuse and be arrested, and then find it in court.
It's 100% what to do.
Let them arrest you on suspicion. The cost of the lawyer will be less than the DUI fines and lost income due to all of it.
"No thank you, officer. If that means I am under arrest then I am under arrest and would like to invoke my 5th amendment right at this time. I will not be answering any further questions this evening."
🤐
If I refuse a field sobriety test and request s breathalyzer or blood test instead, would I still be arrested?
load more comments
(1 replies)
Refusing a breathalyzer is expensive though thanks to implied consent. The ticket for that is a ton of points.
If you're sober you should absolutely agree to the breathalyzer and the blood test.
It's the field tests that are bogus.
What? You have to pay for the blood test if you refuse the breath analyzer? Everyday I learn something new about the US and everyday I'm shocked about it.
Not sure if you have to pay for the blood test (it wouldn't surprise me), but part of driving on a public road is consenting to a breathalyzer test. They do need a warrant to draw your blood against your will, but they may bully the hospital into doing it anyway. Refusing to take one is a crime that in combination with any other violation can get your license suspended.
It may be worth going that route if you are marginally over the limit and a few hours would sober you up.
100% nonsense.
We've already got plenty of peer reviewed science.
Tolerance is everything, and there's no empirical way to measure it.
Well perhaps we'd better come up with something. Perhaps something along the lines of those "are you really awake?" alarm apps that require you to solve some puzzles, but specifically testing driving skills/reactions, before the vehicle will start.
If there was a way to determine...
"Are you so high that reality frames are kind of strobey?"
That's the real point where THC is an issue with motor skills.
But ititerally doesn't happen to regular users. So it's... Amorphous
Seems to me driving does not just require adequate motor skills, it also requires adequate reactions, decision-making and observation.
The real barrier to development is that companies don't want to be in the position of "your app cleared this person to drive and they killed my wife."
These the same cops that mag dump because of an acorn? The same cops that "OD" if fentanyl is in the same hemisphere as themselves? The cops that lost a rifle while "raiding" an "illegal" "grow op"? Those cops?
(X)
The problem is there is no legal threshold for marijuana like there is for alcohol. If they think you are at all intoxicated they will take you in. Never admit to a cop that you have ingested marijuana in any capacity if you are pulled over.
Also, don't lie about it. Just respectfully refuse to answer any questions about it.
I got maybe a third of the way through the article and had to stop due to rage at the police. Again.
that wouldn't hold up in court. there had to be valid evidence of it, or there's no case.
An officers word is absolutely used as evidence.
or video recording possibly? depends hugely on the judge/corruptness of the court/state. some courts throw out cases based on pure testimony because of the lack of documented evidence in situations like this one. this is usually why cops will make you do sobriety tests, it is used to validate and document the fact that someone is too intoxicated to drive. these actions are usually also recorded, and presented as evidence to the district attorney. a good lawyer can get you out of this situation, especially if its just speculation from the officer. the more evidence they have on you, the harder it is to prove your innocence, and vise-versa. either way, lawyer up!
Trust the experts!
And everyone is a critic
Fuck driving. You'd be lucky to get me off the couch. 😆
Obviously ACAB, but...I have known a few jackasses who thought nothing of driving while high. Just don't. And don't reply to me about how you "know your tolerance" or that you can "handle it". Fuck you, you're impaired. Don't do it.
While in principle, I don't disagree. If you're impaired, you shouldn't drive. I lost a parent after they were hit by a drunk driver.
However, there are monstrously different amounts of impairment. You have reaction times and motor skills, decision making and judgement, awareness and attention.
Implying any type of impairment to be an unequivocal "no" to driving is short sighted, in my opinion. It's the easy argument to point at any mind-altering substance: caffeine, tobacco, or antidepressants could be classified an impaired driver.
It's also worth pointing out that even different emotions could dramatically alter driving performance. Not that we would ever think about restrictions on crying while driving.
this post was submitted on 01 Nov 2024
489 points (99.0% liked)
News
23282 readers
3764 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS