I was driving near sheffield arena last week when I saw a police car pulling over drivers to see if they had been drinking or had too much the night before.
Now I was under the impression that the police do NOT have the right to random breath test people unless they either have
1 commited a moving traffic offence
2 they have reasonable grounds to think you have been drinking.
3 you have a light out or some other defect on your vehicle.
Can someone tell me if im right about this ?

There is no excuse for drink driving. I for one would be happy to be stopped and breathalysed. In nearly 2 decades of driving over half a million miles I have never been breathalised once.

Despite having an extremely busy social life and drinking between 2-3 gallons of ale a week. I never drive when I'm under the influence of drink. It is interesting to note how careful you must be on the day after drinking as well. I once knew a bloke who had had nothing to eat or drink for 24 hours after his 6 pints of stella the night before, and he was breathalyzed on his way home from work the following evening and he lost his licence and job.

Throughout my adult life I have known several people who think that driving and drinking are a normal part of life. Most of them are extremely selfish people who see driving as a right. Driving isn't a right it's a privalage. And nobody has any right to make themselves more of a hazard to others. And the fact that some of them constantly get away with just passing the brethalyser test, despite having had much more than they should have, only makes matters worse.

I have no objection to this,will cause me a couple of minutes lost.Better to lose that than all of them.
Although I do understand the fears of the ever encroaching police,pc,nanny state.

I got pulled and tested once, and after the test showed I was fine.. I had a bit of a chat to the guys about my soundsystem, they weren't having a dig.. but were genuinely interested :)

Originally posted by matsalleh

Although I do understand the fears of the ever encroaching police,pc,nanny state.

Yes, I know what you mean. How long will it be before a breathalizer device is fitted to every car as standard, and you have to breathe and pass the test before the car starts?

Good idea in theory.. but no doubt about it, it will cost the taxpayers billions.

i remember something about a change that allowed the police to just pull people at random, can't remember if it was just discussed or implemented though.

6 pints of stella and 24 hours later, he must have had a liver disfunction then because a healthy liver will process alcohol at a rate of 1 pint every 2 hours, so 12 hours (from his first drink, not his last) he would have removed all the alcohol from his system.

I think some are missing the point,im not questioning if it's right to drink and drive ,more if the police have the right to random breath test.
Like I said I dont think it's the law yet but maybe we have some one on the forum who can clarify the position on this?

Originally posted by royjames
I was driving near sheffield arena last week when I saw a police car pulling over drivers to see if they had been drinking or had too much the night before.
Now I was under the impression that the police do NOT have the right to random breath test people unless they either have
1 commited a moving traffic offence
2 they have reasonable grounds to think you have been drinking.
3 you have a light out or some other defect on your vehicle.
Can someone tell me if im right about this ?

Bit off the subject, but can't the police do dna testing at random in th UK ?

Originally posted by Cyclone
i6 pints of stella and 24 hours later, he must have had a liver disfunction then because a healthy liver will process alcohol at a rate of 1 pint every 2 hours, so 12 hours (from his first drink, not his last) he would have removed all the alcohol from his system.

Well he was one of those small, extremely skinny blokes who smoked a lot, so it's possible. Although the police said that he would have been absolutely fine if he'd have eaten something. I always took it to be a valuable lesson myself.

I'm not sure about the legalities, as Cyclone said I too thought there had been a change in the law recently, wouldnt it come under the same as the 'stop and search' powers the police now have?

TBH, if you have nothing to hide then whats the worry? The right wing are always telling us Law and Order is a massive problem caused by the 'do gooding' liberals in Power. If random breath tests catch just one drink driver then its got to be worth it. Same can be said for speed cameras - I personnally think there aren't enough.

Mat

Originally posted by royjames
I think some are missing the point,im not questioning if it's right to drink and drive ,more if the police have the right to random breath test.
Like I said I dont think it's the law yet but maybe we have some one on the forum who can clarify the position on this?

I don't think that the police have ever needed much of a reason to stop a car. I was once stopped in attercliffe by a police car to show me that I had some water in my back light. I think the only worry they realistically have is if they constantly question only darker skinned drivers, as they don't want to be accused of institutional racism.

I know people who have been banned for drink driving, who don't stop doing it, or slow down, when they get their licence back. I think the police should stop and test these people whenever they find them driving.
Of course I you already drink a lot, and your car is removed from you, you are unlikey to cut down. More likely to have a more severe drinking problem a few months down the line.

Originally posted by GazB
Yes, I know what you mean. How long will it be before a breathalizer device is fitted to every car as standard, and you have to breathe and pass the test before the car starts?

Good idea in theory.. but no doubt about it, it will cost the taxpayers billions.

Take a look at the following link

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-950642,00.html

That day may be closer than we think,and a good thing too to my mind.

While on the subject of drink drive I am told there are proposals to lower the limit from 35 to 15 mills in the blood.
If this comes in, the accepted benchmark that you are ok to just have the one pint of beer will no longer be the case.
I can also see many more convictions which in itself is no bad thing.

Originally posted by royjames
While on the subject of drink drive I am told there are proposals to lower the limit from 35 to 15 mills in the blood.
If this comes in, the accepted benchmark that you are ok to just have the one pint of beer will no longer be the case.
I can also see many more convictions which in itself is no bad thing.


To avoid the constant confusion over how much you can have and drive (it does vary depending on what you eat, your body size etc etc) Why not just say no alcohol at all?

Originally posted by mat1978
To avoid the constant confusion over how much you can have and drive (it does vary depending on what you eat, your body size etc etc) Why not just say no alcohol at all?

Yes that is the best way to look at it but I also think the country pub and those not in the best location might suffer from losing those who call just for the one pint.
This will be a real shame,less choice for everyone.

Originally posted by mat1978
To avoid the constant confusion over how much you can have and drive (it does vary depending on what you eat, your body size etc etc) Why not just say no alcohol at all?

Zero, would be nigh on impossible to achieve mat, everyones body carries a little bit of natural alcohol, that's why even one pint can be pushing your luck.

I tested one of the machines they have in the nick that give the read out that is used to decide whether or not you get charged, and although I had not had a drink for over a week it still showed up some in my blood stream, I ave not risked even a pint since.

Good luck to the police in their job to nail each and everyone who drinks and drives, and if you know someone who is drinking and driving, ring the police and give details of where they are, and what they are driving. You might save their life, as well as the lives of some innocent people.

Originally posted by royjames
Yes that is the best way to look at it but I also think the country pub and those not in the best location might suffer from losing those who call just for the one pint.
This will be a real shame,less choice for everyone. correct but if you want to go in these out of the way pubs and spend time and petrol getting out there surely you could arrange a dry driver sort of rota so you could enjoy the night or failing that have a soft drink,personally i wouldnt spend half an hour driving to a rural pub just for one pint knowing any more would be at the risk of losing my licence

I dont think the police are allowed to perform random breath tests (see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3739599.stm from May 2004) but I personally wouldn't have a problem if they did.

If im driving at all - I dont drink at all. I expect a great many other people are the same.

Im sure I read somewhere in the last few months about cars with breathalisers built into the ingition system to prevent people from starting the car if too drunk - anyone else read about this? or did i imagine it?

Originally posted by poppins
Bit off the subject, but can't the police do dna testing at random in th UK ? not even non-randomly. You have to volunteer (I think). Can they in the states?

I hope they never start asking us to prove sobriety by saying the alphabet backwards like in the states. I can't even do that sober!

Thanks for the link edd yes it confirms my beleif that random testing is illegal in this country.
Mind you it looks like the E U are going to have a say in this in the future,more laws going to europe.

Thats true Roy, but the article does say:

Under existing laws, UK police can only carry out a breath test if they believe the driver has been drinking.

Which is vague enough to mean almost anything!

Originally posted by Edd
Thats true Roy, but the article does say:



Which is vague enough to mean almost anything!
Don't you realise we live in a police state now the police can do what ever they want.:(

I think that the police should be able to conduct random tests regardless of if they suspect an individual of drink driving.
By over indulging the night before people excercise the same lack of responsibility as those who have a few down the pub and then get straight in their cars.

The more people the police catch and prosecute the happier I'll be.

Originally posted by Bikertec
Don't you realise we live in a police state now the police can do what ever they want.:(

Could you explain how the police having the right to conduct random tests on drivers to see if they're drink driving makes a police state?

The simple thing to do is, if you are driving- don't drink at all!

I always tell my Dad off if he has one drink when driving cause he repeatedly tells me about the dangers of drink driving.

my friend got pulled last week, sorry but no sympathy for drink drivers. he was 3x over. So dangerous. So stupid.

Originally posted by NatalieSheff
my friend got pulled last week, sorry but no sympathy for drink drivers. he was 3x over. So dangerous. So stupid.


My thoughts exactly, don't do it if you hate the punishment. The law is the law and this is fair.

I would change the law to no alcohol at all if you're driving.

It seems that younger people who drink and drive get caught when they have an accident. (I know a few of these, it seems that it happens quite often, see local press) But older drivers who have been doing it for years, seem to manage to drive home tanked up, without drawing undue attention to themselves. It wouldn't surprise me if there are ten times the amount of people over 40 who drink and drive. See any pub car park at night. I would like to see the police brethylising everyone who comes out of the pub car park. There is no excuse for drinking and driving at all, all it takes is some thing like a dog running infront, or a brick on the road, of one of these drivers while the're on the way home, for their dulled senses to overeact, or cause the car to veer into oncoming traffic and cause death or serious injury to an innocent party.

What makes me angry is people in the affluent treelined avenues near door/totley/whirlow/bents green etc, some of who have, fastened markers and reflectors onto their driveways and trees. I only found out the reason for this when I started working with some people from that area. It seems that it is to help them find their driveway in the dark when they are less sober.

i have to admit my gramps drinks and drives (lives in Spain). little different out there - no traffic and he seems to handle drink better than i would
i know im not capable of driving after one drink, no way after a full-on night
known people drive on drugs, its just as bad - stupid

should the police be randomly allowed to knock on your door (wherever you are now) and demand to search your house for illegal drugs, or weapons, or something else?

Assuming that you just answered no, then thats the argument for not allowing random stop and searches or random stop and tests of any kind. It's unfair to the people who aren't guilty of anything and generally against the principles of our law.

I completely agree that drink driving is wrong, although I'm not in the 'zero tolerance' group.
But I don't think i'd support the police right to random stops, if I were asked.

as long as it was random then i agree, police are there to protect us and they gotta do what they gotta do

Originally posted by NatalieSheff
as long as it was random then i agree, police are there to protect us and they gotta do what they gotta do

fortunately at the moment they require a warrant to enter your property unless you let them in. I don't see how this is any different to requiring reasonable suspicion before being allowed to pull a car up.

sorry i thought we were talking stop n search on streets or in cars - dont think id be happy with em in my house - too messy! and my other half may have just done a number 2:hihi:

Originally posted by NatalieSheff
sorry i thought we were talking stop n search on streets or in cars - dont think id be happy with em in my house - too messy! and my other half may have just done a number 2:hihi:

we were. I just drew the comparison with them randomly demanding access to your home in order to search it. It's the same issue just on a different scale.

Originally posted by Cyclone
should the police be randomly allowed to knock on your door (wherever you are now) and demand to search your house for illegal drugs, or weapons, or something else?

No but that is a different issue (to quote Tony Blair :P)

I completely agree that drink driving is wrong, although I'm not in the 'zero tolerance' group.
But I don't think i'd support the police right to random stops, if I were asked.

I very much support them.

Imagine if someone close to you had been involved in a accident as a result of a drink driver.

Surely the police ought to be able to check whoever they want.

If there are signs that the police are out to clamp down on drink driving even more then maybe people will be less inclined to do it!

i think its true that customs can do that anyway?! warrant or not.

I feel cyclone makes a valid point,I wonder what the reaction woul'd be if you use the same logic about the police having the right to enter your home and test you for drink or drugs or whatever.

Originally posted by NatalieSheff
i think its true that customs can do that anyway?! warrant or not.

HMCE have far more powers than the police, they don't need a warrant to enter your home, and are a lot less likely to be accountable than the bobbies, at least the police have a number on their shoulder, that is visible to anyone who cares to take it. The customs & excise frequentlly don't even wear uniforms.

You don't need to fear either of them however, unless you bring in too many ciggies from abroard, or the odd container of vino mucho collapso, for the street Chrismas party , then BE AFRAID, BE VERY AFRAID :roll: :nod: :nono: :razz:

Originally posted by markham
I hope they never start asking us to prove sobriety by saying the alphabet backwards like in the states. I can't even do that sober!


I think you might be in trouble mate - US style impairment tests are on their way :P

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4116779.stm

Just to add a little cavitat to this thread,I have seen on the news plans to test drivers for having taken drugs.
This is to be applauded,we need to ensure those under the influence of drugs are caught and punished the same as those who drink.

theres a thing on bbc news about new drugs tests being used on drivers

For clarification-
police can cause a car to stop whilst driving for the purpose of examining driving documents. You do not have to commit a moving traffic offence. Whilst stopped, any driver can be REQUIRED to give a breath test. If alcohol is NOT suspected then there is no power of arrest but you may be reported on summons for refusal. The courts have upheld that stopping cars to breathalyse drivers is a lawful reason- there is caselaw for this. Also, the new US style tests to replace breathalysers are in combination with the suspicion of being impaired through drugs as there is no real test at the moment- if someone looks impaired and they pass the breath test, they can be arrested under suspicion of driving under the influence of drink or drugs anyway.

The easy way out of this is simple. DONT DRINK & DRIVE.
I have no problem with the police following me or stopping me, I know I am clear so no worries.

I do not drive whilst drinking and agree that people who do so should be prosecuted however I have found that the motorist has always been an easy target by the police for collecting revenue for the coffers.


I was involved in an accident where the person that hit my vehicle was drunk and had no insurance.
I was informed by the police that as no one was injured, I was to exchange info' and deal through my insurance.....in short the police didn't want to know.

Drink driving is seriouse, but when you take into consideration the number of people that are caught D.U.I. that also have no insurance, the law is a joke!

Take 2 examples,

A person who is legal in every way has a drink at night, Sleeps it off and next morning sets off to work.....on the way he gets picked up and breathalised which proves positive....Although the driver feels in controll and is driving ok...he loses his licence and his job then has to pay a large fine.

A 16 year old who has no licence or insurance and is intoxicated, fails to stop for the police.....is then caught after a chase through a residential area, recieves a small fine, a few hours community service and a driving ban for 12 months.

I do believe that US style roadside tests should be carried out before deciding to take a breath test.

I have a breath tester at home and even though I may not have had a drink found that the reading was affected by smoking and if any medication had been taken ie, cough mixture,
even the use of mouth wash could put anyone over the limit if you are pulled within half an hour after useing it.

My point is, I agree with testing if the driver has done something to warrant being pulled over but I am against the stopping and testing of anyone pulled up at random....firstly it is not practical and if they are to do it, they should stop everyone......

if you really object to being breathalysed (because it's a random stop) and you have a few hours to spare.

"I'm asthmatic officer, you'll have to take me down to the station and perform a blood test".

Originally posted by Cyclone
if you really object to being breathalysed (because it's a random stop) and you have a few hours to spare.

"I'm asthmatic officer, you'll have to take me down to the station and perform a blood test".


................... and then get done for wasting police time when they find out you're lying :loopy:

Originally posted by Mo
................... and then get done for wasting police time when they find out you're lying :loopy:

which they will do how?

Originally posted by Edd
I think you might be in trouble mate - US style impairment tests are on their way :P

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4116779.stm

Yeah and they're tough....

http://www.pcrob.com/DUIStopcanhedoiut.htm :P :D :thumbsup: :hihi:

Nomme

Originally posted by nomme
Yeah and they're tough....

http://www.pcrob.com/DUIStopcanhedoiut.htm :P :D :thumbsup: :hihi:

Nomme

Very good!

Nomme, you might like Bill Hicks ~ Love Laughter Truth.

I have it on CD if you are bothered.

Came upon a random breath test operation last night
We were pulled over, asked if the drivers had been drinking...replied no, so sent on our way. Excellent Officer,politeand courtious. The police had caught some DD so well done to them !!!

Originally posted by Delboy3
I have a breath tester at home and even though I may not have had a drink found that the reading was affected by smoking and if any medication had been taken ie, cough mixture,
even the use of mouth wash could put anyone over the limit if you are pulled within half an hour after useing it.


A breath tester??

I had no idea you could own these, I think they're a good idea to be able to buy them to check if you're ok to drive.

Originally posted by IanMitchell
A breath tester??

I had no idea you could own these, I think they're a good idea to be able to buy them to check if you're ok to drive.
Ian, you can buy them easily..they give the European reading as well as the UK limit........I have used mine on many occasion after a night out....they are pretty accurate too....

Be an idea to advertise them a bit more wouldn't it???

How much do they cost, I'll get Deejay one for christmas :clap:

Originally posted by IanMitchell
Be an idea to advertise them a bit more wouldn't it???

How much do they cost, I'll get Deejay one for christmas :clap:
I'm not sure now but I bought mine over 2 years ago for around 30 pounds.....it is a driveguard 3598 alcohol tester...


I would imagine that they should be the same price nowadays as electronics have come down in price.......

they are pretty cheap, most garages sell disposable versions.

Question
If your friend was driving the car in front of you and you knew he'd had a few too much to drink, would you call the police ?

Or say your brother/sister was DUI when they left your house, would you make THAT phone call ?

Or are you against DUIs just fro certain people ?

Originally posted by poppins
Question
If your friend was driving the car in front of you and you knew he'd had a few too much to drink, would you call the police ?

Or say your brother/sister was DUI when they left your house, would you make THAT phone call ?

Or are you against DUIs just fro certain people ?

who are you asking?

Personally I wouldn't let my friends or relatives drive after too much to drink.

Originally posted by Cyclone
who are you asking?

Personally I wouldn't let my friends or relatives drive after too much to drink.

How do you stop them ? tie them down ?

No, just take the keys off them.

Originally posted by poppins
How do you stop them ? tie them down ?

like mat said, take their keys. Sit on them if I have too, let their tyres down. There's plenty of ways.