Christmas id here - I just got breathalysed

[STIVH]

In the van and in North Wales

I was as sober as skunk {what ever that is} but the really strange thing was that I actually enjoyed being pulled over and roving I was sober - it felt like I was wasting their time for once.
Pleasant enough chap and I totally agree with the test as I never drink and drive .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ....anymore:(

[Stafford]

What was his reason to pull you? Or was it a random road block? I hope you weren't driving like white van man!

[STIVH]

Random Road Block and I was in my little red Nissan Camper Van. Oh the joys of a travelling salesman??????

[SazzaG]

I got pulled twice last January for random tests - they seemed to keep targeting junctions on my route to work! No problem with it, and they were obviously targeting the morning after drink drivers.

[LVC]

Loving your title there STIVH........ "Christmas id here" ........for a breath test post - hopefully you weren't ask to type the test just blow into the tube :chuckle:

[Nickj]

It is interesting that in theory the police do need a probable cause but they can manipulate one of a dozen major powers to make a random stop.
Infact one police site has a QA section where the question is "Do the police need a reason to stop me whilst I am driving?" and the answer given is "No, the police do not need any reason to stop any person driving".
But they do quote that under the current legislations "The police cannot stop a vehicle just to carry out a random breath test " which is then expanded by "They have to have a reasonable suspicion that the person has consumed alcohol or drugs". You can be tested if "if they have committed a traffic offence whilst the vehicle is in motion" or "failing to comply with a traffic sign" the exception being parking signs!
Oh bugger there goes the random road side block system unless there's a legal way to get around it. So you weren't stopped to perform a 'random breath test' because a random stop for that reason is actually illegal as is random breath testing.

They'd either be checking vehicle documentation.... But don't they have ANPR for that??
Well that is interesting given that all of the police areas have invested heavily in ANPR technology to check vehicle documentation automatically. Freedom of Information requests get slightly fuzzy answers (some like Somerset just won't answer) but from what has been released a busy area like Thames has spent just shy of £2m in the last couple of years and expect to spend £1.2 in the next 3 years just on cameras alone, one camera costs £5k ... sheesh how many do they have!!! Oh won't say under the FOI. That's on top of the £10m contract that Thames signed up to in August to beef up their system. So figure the 40 other UK forces have also spent something like that or a proportionate sum.
BTW this camera data, along with that from 40 forces, also feeds into a national system which should have had parliament approval but the Chief Constables just decided it was good for us and set it up anyway; and the cost for that? umm not seeing it anywhere but that'll be at least £15-20m just to get it off the ground. Another huge database that is rather grey legally to say the least but that's got around by saying it is magic as an anti-terrorism device..
So stops for vehicle documentation checks are a really rather a BS reason and if they want to do these then they could have saved us taxpayers around £200m + and not invested so heavily in ANPR but in people.
Oh they are still going to cut people on the ground but continue to spend millions nationally on this stuff, well they can as the cited logic is that ANPR frees up people ... for 'random stops' to check vehicles.


I've got no problems with police stopping people to do this kind of thing but I would prefer that it wasn't wrapped up or done under the cover and guise of something else which it patently isn't.

Don't get me going on the anti-terrorism act, section 44 stops in 08/09 were over 180000 with all of 255 arrests (that includes a few train spotters taking pictures of carraiges and a few people taking pics of plods)

[jerry]

Joe Stalin's Ghost is alive and well in 10 Downing Street and the snivel service.

[Paivi]

Joe Stalin's Ghost is alive and well in 10 Downing Street and the snivel service.
WTF is your problem, Jerry? Surely nobody in his right mind can object to random breathalyse tests, especially around the 'festive season'? This time of the year, I could swear that half of London car drivers are drunk or at least severely hungover, and I for one, would be more than happy to get these people off the road. If that means that I get delayed by a couple of minutes, that's fine by me.

[sburrows87]

If more bikers lives are saved by not being hit by a drunk car driver then its gotta be worthwhile

[Nickj]

No one is objecting Piavi, except where something that is illegal is carried out.. ie truely 'random' testing.
If the target is drivers who have been drinking then the obvious place to start is pubs and clubs, and to be certain preferably before they get on the road.. but then they haven't done anything other than drink at that point which is quite legal.
Perhaps people should be tested and if they are over the limit for driving be arrested just in case they might drive, you could have rewards paid to people to encourage rooting them out.
As I'm sure you know annually more road deaths are caused through the effects of perscription medicines than drunken drivers manage by a large margin so maybe we ought to take anyone on perscription medicine off the roads too. Given the decreasing funding of the NHS I'm sure management would be happy to have a team attached to the pharmacies to turn in these drug addled menaces, for a small finders fee of course.
And I'm sure that everyone is quite happy that their trips around the country on most major roads be monitored, tracked and logged ... until of course the first case of a motorist exceeding the speed limits based on the averages from A to B goes to court.
After none of us never exceed limits for anything do we :)

[Nickj]

Love a good stir I do ;)

[chris yeatman]

i give up drinking and driving cos i kept spilling it. lol

[Paivi]

No one is objecting Piavi, except where something that is illegal is carried out.. ie truely 'random' testing.
As I'm sure you know annually more road deaths are caused through the effects of perscription medicines than drunken drivers manage by a large margin so maybe we ought to take anyone on perscription medicine off the roads too.
Actually, the research indicates that about the same number of deaths are caused by drug impaired drivers/riders than alcohol impaired ones. And, the drug figure is dominated by illegal drugs, not prescription drugs. But, let's not allow truth to get in the way of a good Daily Mail story, eh.

You actually sound as if you're condoning drinking and driving, and that in your opinion, randomly testing for this is far greater an evil than actually drinking and driving.

In Finland, the police can legally perform random breathalyser tests, and now is the peak period for them. On the whole, people don't seem to mind, even if it does slow their commute by a couple of minutes, as they always manage to catch a few people.

In fact, on discussion forums, both general and bike/car specific ones, people are complaining how rarely they seem to see these spot checks being done. My family has an overall driving experience of approximately 100 years, and has encountered just two tests n that time, the last one having been in the mid-80s. No wonder people are asking for more of these tests. Except in the UK, where it is deemed to be police persecution.

Sometimes I wonder about the mentality of the British people. *shakes head in wonder*

[Capo]

Random Road Block and I was in my little red Nissan Camper Van. Oh the joys of a travelling salesman??????

You fitted the profile perfectly

[uksurfer]

i've never had a breath test, so i'm happy! Get the wife to drive out at night, don't think shes ever been breathalised either.

[Nickj]

My immediate family totals over 250 years driving experience on all of the worlds continents in a wide range of vehicles, members of my family have also been involved in the last 200 years major and minor global conflicts, some were even well known in the bloater smoking trade errr has that any significance to the price of eggs??
We also had one rellie regularly delivered hurricanes and the odd belenhim to Finland in 1939 which were probably used in the Continuation war and one who was in the 5th scots guards. That was a ski battalion formed to go into finland luckily the war ended before they could stand up on skis without breaking themselves, I'm sure like the Iclanders we'd have been seen as terrible invaders.. again nothing to do with anything rather like the miles driven bit but fun stuff none the less
The illegal drug related accidents just add another similar but smaller scale figure, you'd be amazed at the numbers of people given similar drugs and in similar or higher doses as a part of legitimate treatment who continue to drive. Locally we'll give out many times more than would support the local hard drugs population, our endoscopy department has more cocaine than you can shake a stick at!!. The numbers are large, but as they are legal drugs most are not included in the figures, no statistical hole to put them into; as is the case with the cough and cold remedies, hayfever remedies and a huge list of other things including the contrast media frequently in x-ray departments.
And YES in Finland they can, it is legal and endorsed to random test and yep it is a good idea which I'm sure would be socially acceptable. However here it isn't legal to random test unless the stop is for suspicion of or as a part of another stop even if that is for rather spurious and contrived reasons. I didn't say nor have I ever said I am against any kind of testing just as long as it is legal to undertake said test.

The abuse of power by anyone is not a thing to be condoned or tolerated in any society, or is that actually an OK thing ;)

[Bigxr]

Hmm. interesting discussion. I've done 30k miles + PA for the last 25 years in Europe and Africa and I've seen a lot of bad driving. (not all of it mine!) The honest bloke with a bit of residual alcohol in his system, or someone who had a self poured glass of plonk with a working lunch is NOT the problem here. With the highly regulated and organised traffic in the UK - People peeling oranges, reading maps, arguing with their wives/husbands, dealing with squabbling kids, lighting fags, dealing with animals in the vehicle, making phone calls and texting, and even police playing with their RT's are a bigger threat.
The real danger is the PIS*ED-UP driver. They KNOW they're illegal, and no amount of threats or zero tolerance nonsense will dissuade them from being ars*holes. The penalty for being DRUNK in charge of a car (as opposed to being "over the limit") should be on a par with attempted manslaughter.
Problem is though, how can you tell the difference?
Maybe the yanks have a point with their seemingly comical sobriety tests at the side of the road. :booze:

[kneedown]

Hmm. interesting discussion. I've done 30k miles + PA for the last 25 years in Europe and Africa and I've seen a lot of bad driving. (not all of it mine!) The honest bloke with a bit of residual alcohol in his system, or someone who had a self poured glass of plonk with a working lunch is NOT the problem here. With the highly regulated and organised traffic in the UK - People peeling oranges, reading maps, arguing with their wives/husbands, dealing with squabbling kids, lighting fags, dealing with animals in the vehicle, making phone calls and texting, and even police playing with their RT's are a bigger threat.
The real danger is the PIS*ED-UP driver. They KNOW they're illegal, and no amount of threats or zero tolerance nonsense will dissuade them from being ars*holes. The penalty for being DRUNK in charge of a car (as opposed to being "over the limit") should be on a par with attempted manslaughter.
Problem is though, how can you tell the difference?
Maybe the yanks have a point with their seemingly comical sobriety tests at the side of the road. :booze:
thing is in the uk what do we do with these scum slap on the wrist told not to drive for a while ;when the twats are to drunk to know what day it is ;and it is not just car or van drivers i have been to bike pubs and seen the fools

[Liz]

I got knocked off my FS1E (yes, that's what I said!) by some bloke who had just come out of the pub and pulled out of a parking space in front of me. Bike went into the side of the car, I went over the bonnet! Fortunately, lots of witnesses and I wasn't hurt!

My opinion is, that everyone should be required to ride a bike before they drive a car, it would make a hell of a lot of people much more aware! Too many loud cd players and 'coccooned' car drivers in their own little world! Me too, but I do keep an eye on the mirror and move over for a bike if I can.

[Bigxr]

A Pis*ed up driver ploughed into a group of my friends doing the hokey kokey on new years eve some years ago. The C**t killed a good mates daughter, (which had the effect of ending his life too) crippled another of my mates and he got off with 2 lousy years. He only did this because he was blind drunk. If he was just over the limit he would have been capable of avoiding it.
He was punished in other, more direct and long lasting ways, but thats not the point.
Anyone caught DRUNK in charge of a car should do time as attempted manslaughter regardless if there was an incident or not. Once people start getting 10 year stretches attitudes will change.
But for the public to accept coming down hard on them the difference between someone over the limit and someone pi**ed must be made. As I said, the Yanks have a system, and they seem to trust it.

[STIVH]

Crikey this has caused a bit of a rant, didn't realise my typo's either I blame my ****s lexia for that. Just for the record I was just 1 cars length away from another "Random" stop this lunch time on the other end of town the copper didn't realise his mate hadn't finished with the other driver so waved me on as he had just pulled one over himself.
Shame really as I had the tube from yesterday still sitting in my parcel shelf ready to use - you know to help with recycling and all that.

Chatting with folk where I was working though showed just how many local tanked up husbands and wives had actually had a skinful the night before and had been tested and passed!!!!!!

Makes you wonder just how drunk you have gotta be sometimes?

[Nickj]

Have to admit that the test we have is aimed at measurable levels, whereas the states concentrates on physical effect first. A sensible idea using a combination of the two is probably an even better idea.
The reason I'd think that is that we have a girl at work whose ethnicity see's her out of her tree on a sniff of alcohol, it's genetics. She could probably be incapable of safely using a swing bin but still pass the breathalyser test.
It's nice to see a lively debate going on though

[He11cat]

I used to get stopped nearly weekly.. because I was driving home at 2am from work..
I don't object at all but one night I got really fed up .. a police car followed me all across town.

So I turned off thinking it was my imagination and no still tailed me... in the end I got so brassed off I pulled over.
I knew they would pull me or collar me when I stopped.. and so did they.... I took a route to see if they were following me.. I was right.
I had to produce my paperwork..like they had not checked me already..

Trouble was I had my tongue pierced that day so had a bad lisp and a bit slurred...

Policeman insisted I was drunk.. I was trying not to grin when it came up ok!.. I stuck my tongue out and said sorry just had this done!

But to drive around town after me while I tried to drive at 30 and really be careful and seeing I was a woman on my own.. was just im sure we have nothing to do... they should have just got me to pull over..not follow me for 20 mins first it was not nice!!

Got stopped again Sunday morning in Finland.. a line of 8 police blanket breath testing.. its quick , polite , no nonsense and I have no objection at all to having it done...
I know I am going to be ok and have nothing to fear.. thats the way to do it...

I don't drink and drive..

The line up of 8 officers stopping everyone worked.. and it was so fast and fair..

Although in Sweden they had a problem... same methods used but everyone was showing high levels of alcohol ... they where cleaning the equipment with swine flu antibac... the high alcohol content threw the machines heywire.. caused a few problems and a few blood tests... it wasn't evaporating between tests!

Eventually I got so fed up with getting stopped I started walking home.. and then got attacked twice on the way home :(

[Paivi]

Anyone caught DRUNK in charge of a car should do time as attempted manslaughter regardless if there was an incident or not. Once people start getting 10 year stretches attitudes will change.
With people so vehemently against the police randomly breathalysing people, as it infringes their civil liberties and their right to drink and drive, how are these drunk people going to be caught except after the event?

[Bigxr]

With people so vehemently against the police randomly breathalysing people, as it infringes their civil liberties and their right to drink and drive, how are these drunk people going to be caught except after the event?

Good point.
My counter is that if the law commits to coming down heavy on drunks in charge, the first wave of prison sentences will scare the sh*t out of anyone predisposed to getting in their cars drunk.
I was skeptical about the US system at first, but now I can see the beauty of it. Our police are much too hung up on figures and targets to realise that its the effect that kill not some number on a fallible machine.

[gremlin]

I won't drink and drive and usually give mates an earbashing when they do it but I probably would come under the drugged driver banner, although I'm even more careful if I've had to take one of my pills. If I've had two I won't drive I don't think I'm safe. Unfortunately if I have to go out I have to drive as there is no bus service and I can't afford to take taxis everywhere so I can only go out on "good days". Surely funding more cops would keep us far safer than funding the cameras but of course cameras can just dole out tickets 24/7 and makes money and you don't have to pay for its pension at the end of its working life rather than having people who can stop drunks, mobile users, illegal drivers of every ilk who are putting our lives at risk. I'd much rather see more cops, I know I've got a legal car/bike so what's the issue?