IF YOU KNOW YOU'RE DRUNK - NEVER look them in the face - and invoke your 5th and 6th Amendment Rights IMMEDIATELY. The "Flashlight BAC" or any other test would thereafter be COMPLETELY UNCONSTITUTIONAL. But, I think this discussion has gone awry. If you are drunk, they should be able to notice by your driving pattern and should then pull you over accordingly. At that point, invoke your rights or do whatever you want to do. What I don't like are the checkpoints. FOR THE MOST PART, they're not doing it to catch drunk drivers, they're doing it to give tickets out for proof of insurance/license out-of-date/inspection sticker violations. WHY??? MONEY for the Police Department and municipality. I remember hearing one of the local newstations recently giving the statistics of a particular "drunk driving" checkpoint. I forget the exact stats, but it was something like, "Of the 2,500 cars pulled over, there were 4 drunk driving arrest, 145 inspection sticker violations, 90 proof of insurance violations and 75 out of date registration violations." In short, they weren't looking for drunk drivers - THEY WERE LOOKING FOR CASH. I have a friend who recently got a expired inspection sticker (everything else was O.K.) which had expired 3 days earlier. It wasn't part of a checkpoint, so she really didn't have any complaint about being pulled over. She readily admitted that she had just screwed up and forgot. What did piss her off was that the ticket cost $195. A damn inspection sticker is $10, yet a ticket for being out of date for 3 days is $195. Given that "price," is the purpose of inspection sticker to protect the roads or to raise money for the Police departments and the municipalities??? THIS is what they're REALLY looking for at these "checkpoints". And, THAT'S what bothers me and why I severely question the Constitutionality.
I have been hit with the inspection sticker deal - ridiculous. But one thing about inspection stickers - they can SEE the sticker as you drive by - so all they have to do is locate a cop at a corner that you can't see from the approach, and he can pull people over knowing that they've violated. I agree that the cop should pull people over based on driving patterns, etc. However, DUI will still be impossible to prove. Reckless driving will not. But can you start putting people in jail for 5 reckless driving violations. Why not, really
I got an expired inspection sticker on LA1 returning home from my ex-girlfriend's house in Brusly. The cop (a Brusly city PO) was standing in the middle of the two lanes, just acting like he was directing traffic. He saw me, and immediately flagged me over and down.
If they want to crack down on DWI, instead of doing a field sobriety test they should have a DWI center where they can take the suspected drunk to obtain a warrant. The idea that the person sobers up over time is bunk--your BAC only drops by .02 per hour. A lot of drunks are far enough over .08 that the cops will still be able to nail them 2-3 hours later.
Another great way out of a DWI is to debate the validity of the test based on the frequency of calibration of the breathalyzer machine. Most manufacturer's of breathalyzers suggest calibration on a very regular basis. Often, it's much more cost prohibitive than one would imagine. Because of this, PD's just don't calibrate the machines with the same frequency of the manufacturer's suggestions. Powerful defense cases have been built and acquittals have often occurred after you subpoena the calibration verification information, and the PD's can either not produce them, or produce information that makes the court doubt the accuracy of the information. This was something I found out through friends that work at the PD that I could have hung my hat on. The PD in DS doesn't even keep the records, that I'm aware of. This would mean they couldn't even produce a single time when the machine would have been serviced or calibrated.
Of course the scariest thing about this thread is I agree with Bud on something :shock: Checkpoints are intended to gather incriminating information on people without reasonable grounds for individual suspicion. Unconstitutional as hell, but that never stops the gubamint from grabbing power.
