Derek

Kingston, RI

#28 Jun 1, 2009
Cops don't need to understand a lot of procedure. Their job is to arrest people. Once a person is arrested for a criminal act the state, not the police, have the burden of proving it in a court room.

“No time like the present”

Since: Jul 08

to make it happen!

#29 Jun 1, 2009
Billy J wrote:
They will not allow you to set in a cell for 12 hours before you blow. You have 2 hours to have a witness there otherwise you have to have your blood taken whether you let them or not. They will strap you in a chair and take it. If you tell them you dont want to blow until you want to its the same thing as refusing. You cant get out of a DUI anymore...impossible unless you blew the legal limit. In my state it is .08. I am going through DUI punishment as we speak.
More misinformation...unless your state is different than the other 49. As I understand it, the Supreme Court long ago, upheld the right of any citizen to refuse the breathalyzer or blood test UNLESS THERE HAS BEEN AN ACCIDENT. That does not of course, keep state law from punishing those who do refuse it, however. I doubt in any case, that any state's law would allow the "strapping down" for the purposes of a blood test unless there was an accident or situation resulting in injury. But hey, I've been wrong before.

However, here in Oregon, blowing under the legal limit does NOT keep you from getting a ticket of driving while impaired. That's a myth. A good friend of mine lost his license and had to attend Diversion classes for several weeks. He blew a .04, half the legal limit of .08. But he was swerving, obviously impaired and it was on video.

“No time like the present”

Since: Jul 08

to make it happen!

#30 Jun 1, 2009
Derek wrote:
Cops don't need to understand a lot of procedure. Their job is to arrest people. Once a person is arrested for a criminal act the state, not the police, have the burden of proving it in a court room.
Indeed. At that point the cop becomes a witness for the prosecution, not the prosecutor.
Amused

Rantoul, IL

#31 Jun 1, 2009
Derek wrote:
Cops don't need to understand a lot of procedure. Their job is to arrest people. Once a person is arrested for a criminal act the state, not the police, have the burden of proving it in a court room.
More scary misconceptions. Reading this post is just another example of how most have no idea of what they are talking about.

Law enforcement is all about procedures. DUI laws perhaps carry with them the most procedures that a cop has to know very well as DUI cases have evolved into a huge game. Little mistakes or not following strict procedures by a cop could end up in a technicality and dismissed charges or a not guilty verdict (regardless of evidence). What cops do, don't do, say, time frames, how they conduct tests, environment and many of other factors play a role in any DUI arrest/prosecution. There are many things that cops follow (procedures) in a DUI arrest that the typical (drunk) person is probably unaware of while he is busy sucking on a potato to "beat" the tests.

One example....Most states have some sort of communications clause that allow the accused to make a reasonable number of phone calls to ask friends, family or an attorney whether or not they should consent to a test. Nothing else. Most states require the cop to make that opportunity to make those phone calls available and even assist the accused to make those calls, within reason. Most states don't require the cop to offer that beforehand but if the accused asks, the cop must abide (that is a procedure. Doesn't matter how drunk the person is or how many people the person killed.-If the cop fails to follow procedure in a DUI then evidence can be suppressed and the person can potentially "get off".

You are wrong in that their role is to just "arrest" people and that the prosecutor has to prove them guilty. The prosecutor relies on police testimony and evidence in the case of a DUI. Cops testify to their observations and evidence and need to be able to clearly articulate any violation of a law by stating those observations and evidence within the procedures of DUI laws.

No cop should ever arrest anyone unless the cop is able to articulate what happened in court. The prosecutor wasn't there and depends on the cops' testimony.

Your post suggests that cops just "arrest" people regardless of evidence or probable cause and it is simply all on the prosecutor to find the person guilty. Doesn't make sense.

By following the logic that cops just arrest people, it would lend that they do so without worrying about probable cause (evidence, witnesses)and just leave the rest to the prosecutor to try and find the person guilty. In other words, an innocent man can be walking down the street and just be "arrested" without evidence or witnesses and the cop just leaves it to the prosecutor to find him guilty.-The cop really plays no role in testifying to why the person was arrested and what procedures were followed during that arrest.

Your thinking is flawed.
Its a mee a marrioo

Rochester, NH

#32 Jun 14, 2009
diagree wrote:
<quoted text>Mind your biz nosey-a$$. That is not what he's trying to say, He's just stating the FACT that everyone should know their rights!
OK LISTEN UP! YOU CAN GET BREATHALYZED IN OTHER PLACES BESIDES ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD! YESTERDAY MORNING COPS BUSTED AN UNDERAGE PARTY IN A FIELD, AND PEOPLE WHO DIDN'T RUN WERE FORCED TO TAKE THE BREATHALYZER TEST. 10 of us failed 3 passed (i was one) HYPERVENTILATION WORKS!
Its a mee a marrioo

Rochester, NH

#33 Jun 14, 2009
OK LISTEN UP! YOU CAN GET BREATHALYZED IN OTHER PLACES BESIDES ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD! YESTERDAY MORNING COPS BUSTED AN UNDERAGE PARTY IN A FIELD, AND PEOPLE WHO DIDN'T RUN WERE FORCED TO TAKE THE BREATHALYZER TEST. 10 of us failed 3 passed (i was one) HYPERVENTILATION WORKS!

Since: Oct 08

South Bay, Fl.

#34 Jun 14, 2009
I'm going to post this one more time. If you've been drinking and get pulled over by the law, bring a raw (not rotten) potatoe with you. Before the officer see's the potatoe bite it and chew as much as posible and then hide it. It will not help passing the BAC test but, it will get the alcohol off of your breath momentarily so the officer will more than likely not give the test to you.
COP

Wetumpka, AL

#35 Jul 13, 2009
www_Allthaclubz_com wrote:
If you are caught driving under the influence of alcohol, do not refuse to take a breathalyzer test. Instead, insist that you will not blow until your attourney is present. This your right according to the law. Next, have someone call your attourney and tell him to come to where ever they have you locked up. Insruct the attourney to wait at least 12 hours before he shows up. According to studies alchol leaves your body aprox. 12 hours after your last drink. Even if every last drop of alcohol isn't gone,after 12 hours, it will most definitely be reduced substantially. For more dwi info log on to http://www.dwi-news.blogspot.com Also remember to to click on a few of our sponsors ads to help keep us up and running so we can provide the most current dwi news and info. Drink responsibly.
None of this is accurate in the state of Albama you do not have the right to speak to your attorney until after taking the Drager which is the only approved machine in the stae of Alabama. Secondly it can take up to 24 hours for the alcohol to leave your system
2ter

Norman Park, GA

#36 Aug 12, 2009
First of all the police have no intention of keeping drunks off the street. Or any other kind of public safety for that matter. It's a business just like any other, they just want your money and nothing more. With enough money you can actually get away with MURDER in this country.
2ter

Norman Park, GA

#37 Aug 12, 2009
Oh yeah, DON'T DRINK AND DRIVE!!!
Breatho

Sunnyvale, CA

#38 Sep 9, 2009
diagree wrote:
<quoted text>Mind your biz nosey-a$$. That is not what he's trying to say, He's just stating the FACT that everyone should know their rights!
Some people just want to know how to beat the test. 20 year olds who live with their parents for example. The parents can buy breath analysis machines at Walgreens. So the kid doesn't want to get grounded so what? Not everyone is looking to drink and drive for the love of God.
Big Joe

United States

#39 Nov 7, 2009
Hyperventilating 20 seconds before you take the test is your best bet. You can read more details at http://duistuff.blogspot.com/2009/11/how-to-b...

“No time like the present”

Since: Jul 08

to make it happen!

#40 Nov 7, 2009
Big Joe wrote:
Hyperventilating 20 seconds before you take the test is your best bet. You can read more details at http://duistuff.blogspot.com/2009/11/how-to-b...
Hmmm..lessee, already drunk, now nervouse for being pulled over AND going to hyperventilate for 20 seconds...hahahahaha the next thing you'll know is being put on a stretcher as you come to. And then getting arrested.
Jacked Hoff

Boise, ID

#41 Dec 25, 2009
I adovocate drinking and driving like it used to be allowed before all of the self rightous idiots. Cops used to just call you a cab if they stopped you. That's the way it should be. Too many rediculous laws in the US. Just like smoking pot. You should be able to smoke all of the pot you want.
Ron

AOL

#43 Jan 27, 2010
You should not drink and drive of course,but I have been there and payed the price!
1.)They sell charcole pills over the counter at your local drug store wich will hide the smell.
2.)It is not a LAW that you have to take a field test.
3.)You have rights!DO NOT take the breath test.If given a choice take a urine test which is less accurate.They can not force a blood test due to health reasons,beleifs,ect.doctors will not take blood if a patient refuses.He is bound by oath to pretect the interest of the patient NOT the police!
3.)POLICE LIE!They will tell you have to take the test but you dont.
4.)If you must drink mix it with spicey foods wich will mask the odor also use cough drops.
5.)Never take the field breath test.If you do and it shows you have been drinking,they will take you to the station and put you on the big machine.
Just try to pace your drinking and you should be fine or just stay home and get hammered.Be sure you have enough to last the night if not then go to bed!
Todd

Maynardville, TN

#44 Jan 28, 2010
Who lies more? The police or people caught up in the wrong? This is both good and bad advice you give. However be careful. There are consequences for refusing which in the long run may make it worse for many. Most will be convicted even if they refuse all the things you said and as a double whammy will have to suffer longer periods of punishment or sanctions for refusing. Beating a drunken driving charge just isn't as easy as saying "no". There are many other factors that are taken under consideration. Most who refuse and break the contract of having a driver's license regret refusing in the long run. Yes. Every person who has a driver's license signs their name to it and agrees that they will provide breath, blood or urine if they are suspected of drinking and driving. Most states have harsh penalties for breaking that "implied" contract.

The police lie thing doesn't work as well these days with the advent of patrol car cameras and microphones. Ironically, most of those allegations are found to be unfounded these days by simply reviewing the tapes.

It's silly for someone who is drunk to try to conceal it by ingesting something. There is nothing that will work.-other than sleeping it off and letting it dispel from the body. Impairment manifests itself in many, many ways. Only drunk people think they aren't drunk and that no one else will notice.

Lastly, the police can force a drunk driver to provide blood in the case when someone else is seriously hurt or dead. That blood can be taken by force if necessary with the assistance of a dr.
Ron wrote:
You should not drink and drive of course,but I have been there and payed the price!
1.)They sell charcole pills over the counter at your local drug store wich will hide the smell.
2.)It is not a LAW that you have to take a field test.
3.)You have rights!DO NOT take the breath test.If given a choice take a urine test which is less accurate.They can not force a blood test due to health reasons,beleifs,ect.doctors will not take blood if a patient refuses.He is bound by oath to pretect the interest of the patient NOT the police!
3.)POLICE LIE!They will tell you have to take the test but you dont.
4.)If you must drink mix it with spicey foods wich will mask the odor also use cough drops.
5.)Never take the field breath test.If you do and it shows you have been drinking,they will take you to the station and put you on the big machine.
Just try to pace your drinking and you should be fine or just stay home and get hammered.Be sure you have enough to last the night if not then go to bed!
aaron krennis

AOL

#45 Feb 14, 2010
the best wat to beat is not to drink and drive.
crusaderjd

Huntington Beach, CA

#46 Feb 14, 2010
nuka wrote:
<quoted text>
In all fairness..Bush didnt allow or promote drunk driving either.
However, Bush and Chaney both had drunk driving convictions. Is that worse than running a war while drunk?
crusaderjd

Huntington Beach, CA

#47 Feb 14, 2010
In Calif the government allows sales of alcohol at gas stations mini marts. Now tell me the state isn't encouraging drinking and driving.
crusaderjd

Huntington Beach, CA

#48 Feb 14, 2010
Todd wrote:
Who lies more? The police or people caught up in the wrong? This is both good and bad advice you give. However be careful. There are consequences for refusing which in the long run may make it worse for many. Most will be convicted even if they refuse all the things you said and as a double whammy will have to suffer longer periods of punishment or sanctions for refusing. Beating a drunken driving charge just isn't as easy as saying "no". There are many other factors that are taken under consideration. Most who refuse and break the contract of having a driver's license regret refusing in the long run. Yes. Every person who has a driver's license signs their name to it and agrees that they will provide breath, blood or urine if they are suspected of drinking and driving. Most states have harsh penalties for breaking that "implied" contract.
The police lie thing doesn't work as well these days with the advent of patrol car cameras and microphones. Ironically, most of those allegations are found to be unfounded these days by simply reviewing the tapes.
It's silly for someone who is drunk to try to conceal it by ingesting something. There is nothing that will work.-other than sleeping it off and letting it dispel from the body. Impairment manifests itself in many, many ways. Only drunk people think they aren't drunk and that no one else will notice.
Lastly, the police can force a drunk driver to provide blood in the case when someone else is seriously hurt or dead. That blood can be taken by force if necessary with the assistance of a dr.
<quoted text>
it is an illegal contract of adhesion, a take it or leave it contract with no negotiation or meeting of the minds. Illegal under calif contract law.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 4 min oxbow 589,398
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 6 min HipGnosis 176,765
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 8 min Jac 837,063
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 39 min truthandcommonsense 4,086
how do shoutouts on snapchat work? 49 min stargate6 1
The unusual sex life of the vampire squid 53 min monkeyofstick 2
What do u think of Jesus Christ?(God) (Oct '06) 1 hr RiccardoFire 70,196
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 4 hr Freebird USA 271,265
More from around the web