EDIT:
The law is complicated on this topic and it varies by region. I didn’t think this needed saying when I made the post, but this isnt an end all be all on the topic, it’s just something I found interesting & posted it to c/Today I Learned.
Don’t take legal advice from a Lemmy post. Talk to a lawyer.
The Purpose of Portable Breath Tests
Portable breath tests are commonly used by law enforcement officers to quickly estimate a person’s blood alcohol content (BAC) at the scene of a suspected DUI offense. These handheld devices are designed to provide immediate results, helping officers in their decision-making process during a traffic stop or investigation.
It is essential to understand that a portable breath test is different from the more accurate breathalyzer devices used at police stations or during formal chemical testing. While portable breath tests can provide an initial indication of a person’s intoxication level, they should not be considered as wholly accurate or infallible.
https://rhilllaw.com/blog/2021/03/can-a-portable-breath-test-be-used-in-court/
Your edit just reeks of doubling down.
they’re not accepted in court in texas
But you still say “they’re not generally admissable in court”. So where is this generally coming from? Does that apply to the entire US? Do you have any source to back it up with?
Just don’t drink and drive folks.
That won’t help. Innocence is no excuse against American cops.
The one time I had to serve on a jury in the US, it was for a case where a cop was insisting that a young woman was drunk driving. She “failed” the roadside tests that he had rigged her to lose, claimed her car appeared to be swerving slightly (on a road covered in potholes), and then redacted the part of his camera where he gave her a breathalyzer test.
Thankfully it was a very quick consensus to declare her not guilty, but it’s just ridiculous that it even made it to a trial in the first place. The girl did nothing wrong, yet still had to be dragged around with an arrest on record for about a year, hire a lawyer, get brought into court several times, all just because one cop (a new hire, at that) refused to accept that he may have been wrong.
I’m also reminded of the more recent example where a cop still issued a ticket to a woman for allegedly holding a phone while driving in a hand she does not have. Cops in the US think they have the power to rewrite events in their favor, and tragically this succeeds for them more often than not. It’s only the egregious cases that get caught.
Even better, don’t drink at all don’t drive at all. At least if you live somewhere walkable. Tasty juice for me at the bars I guess (why are all the NA options just beer)
I don’t see any chance of making humans stop using drugs.
I mean it’s not like we’re alone in chasing that high either, you can find dolphins chewing on pufferfish, reindeers enjoying fly agaric toadstools, elks getting high on fermented apples, wallabies eating opium poppies and so on.I think teaching responsible use and having proper help available for those that need it is the only real way to handle alcohol and drugs in society.
Oh yeah no I totally agree, I was mostly referring to myself, as I personally don’t do either. I don’t begrudge people who do as long as they’re responsible. Caffeine is a drug too I don’t think anyone is soap boxing that one. I only have issue with others choices affecting my own personal ones I.e. insane amounts of secondhand smoke for example.
It’s time for drug class in high school. Half your teachers were getting high anyway–devote the last period of the day to learning intoxication under experienced supervision.
Woke liberal over here folks.
lol, depending on which side of the pond we’re talking about that statement would fit my whole country.
Also wasps eat fermenting fruit and get pissed too…
You never had a mocktail?
That’s the “tasty juice” I coyly allude to. I was mostly referring to the lack of the emulation of hard liquors or at least ones that you can buy at a bar.
That’s because most “hard liquor” tastes like shit. The purpose of mixed drinks is almost entirely based on trying to hide the alcohol taste.
You can get NA cider
While 0% Gin has been way too sweet when tasting it as is it works remarkably well with tonic to make a GT non-alcoholic.
On the other hand, alcohol free rum resembles real rum only in that both are liquid
Where? State law or federal law? US? Kenya? Tibet?
Well, according to this terrible website. The firm is practising in East Texas
Prolly should heavily fact check this for your area if you plan to either deny the test … or take the test while believing you can utter some magic words to make the results inadmissible.
Sovcits: That sign can’t stop me because I can’t read!
I’d like to imagine this is an 80s flick with a bridge out sign resulting in some impossible hang time.
Refusing a test is always worst-case scenario. It’s immediately considered as if you failed the test. The distinction made here is that the handheld meters aren’t as accurate, and can’t be admitted into evidence in court, so you should never refuse one.
Nope. They’ll say you tested positive for alcohol. The specific number won’t be used, only the detected presence.
A decent lawyer will exploit the distinction though.
If memory serves (depends, check for your area) if you are going to be tested - demand blood because it takes longer and is more accurate so it provides an opportunity to process a bit more alcohol and isnt a refusal.
A related TIL is that none of these machines are built to detect blood alcohol levels. They detect any dissolved organic compound with a methyl group, most of which get absorbed into the blood orders of magnitude more easily than alcohol. Working with VOCs in an enclosed space without PPE can make you blow drunk on these. A good reason to demand a blood test when you know the machine is wrong.
… according to a lawyer in Texas.
In my country they are, as long as they passed a certification.
Sssh. Only America matters on the internet. /s
same here, and you have a blood check after to confirm the value if you’re positive on the
breathnalyzererjdeviceOver here breathalysers are admissible, but you can reject to use them. Police then has to decide wether to call a doctor to draw blood.
In my non-us country they are not, and nor are the portable drug wipes.
In my non-us country portable ones are not admissible. They take you to the station to blow into the big machine. You can refuse of course but that doesn’t lead to anything good.
From the shit I’ve seen in the US, none of these tests even matter. If the cop has made his decision that your drunk, he’ll keep administering you dumb subjective tests and fail you for the slightest mistake.
Where I live if you test positive with the portable one they make you wait 20 minutes and take a second test on a bigger machine. I’ve heard you can then challenge that second test with a blood test but they don’t usually end well.
Refusing to take the breath test will bring you penal charges.
Misinformation.
Always refuse the field test and force them to use the one at the station - then your lawyer should ask for calibration records if you blow above - if these aren’t up to date (which isn’t uncommon) - the results could get thrown out. Don’t admit to shit. Never volunteer info to the police - keep your mouth shut.
In Australia, though it might vary from state to state, you can request a blood test. If there’s no booze bus right there in which they’ll take it, you might be able to make the cop go to the pathologist with you within a few hours during which you might dip under the limit if it was borderline. Never heard of anyone actually pulling this stunt, I’m sure it would royally piss off the cop.
In Germany as well. But the blood test actually requires a judge to sign off (unless you do it voluntary).
Just say no to drug tests! Especially if you have time and the cops don’t. They will usually let you go about your day as they would rather keep doing the breathaliser test with people who don’t know that they can just refuse.
So? Isn’t it standard practice that if you’re determined to be DUI you’re arrested, taken to the station, and have to retake the test on the accurate machine which is admissible in court? I guess this might vary by region though.
yeah, it’s just something I learned today
In non-nyc new york state (idk fuckall about nyc laws) they dont even read out the bac it just signals yes there is alcohol present or no there is no alcohol. Then you go to the precent and they test you there with a machine that give the bac%.
I think it depends on the state. In I think all states it should be noted refusing a breathalyzer, whether driving or not, leads to a yearlong suspension of your driver’s license.
Police also have things like flashlights they can wave in your face that also tell them if you have alcohol on your breath.
