U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
Old 10-07-2009, 09:26 PM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,100 posts, read 23,955,207 times
Reputation: 4808
Quote:
Originally Posted by bransom View Post
So I guess that's admitting that you don't care if innocent are arrested for DUI?
Guilt or innocence is not for the arresting officer to determine.

Their job is to determine if there is a reasonable belief that the accused committed a crime or crimes.

The determination of guilt or innocence is up to the trier of fact.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-07-2009, 09:28 PM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,100 posts, read 23,955,207 times
Reputation: 4808
Quote:
Originally Posted by bransom View Post
But my question was should they be arrested if their BAC reaches .05 and it doesn't affect their driving ability at all?
If there was no erratic driving, then there would not be probable cause to stop the driver (speaking strictly of DUI)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2009, 09:49 PM
 
Location: phoenix, az
84 posts, read 52,094 times
Reputation: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greatday View Post
If there was no erratic driving, then there would not be probable cause to stop the driver (speaking strictly of DUI)
Ok, now that makes sense. But many people think that it's against the law to drink any amount of alcohol and drive. All I have been saying all along iis if someone's driving ability is not affected it should be Ok to drink responsibly and drive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-08-2009, 07:25 AM
 
Location: Orlando, FL
12,153 posts, read 10,498,745 times
Reputation: 6356
Quote:
Originally Posted by bransom View Post
Ok, now let me rephrase the question I first asked you. How about if a person goes out and in the process of having fun at a restaurant, night club or watching a football game at a buddy’s house consumes enough alcohol for their BAC to reach .05 but is not impaired and can still drive home safely. Do you think the DUI laws should be so strict that this person could be arrested for a DUI for driving while impaired to the "SLIGHTEST" degree?
Yes.

That becomes the problem...people think "Oh I can drive home safely. I'm fine." and then they go out and cause accidents.

So for the two times that you were charged with DUI's were you just driving along safely and the police pulled you over for a chit-chat?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2009, 04:51 AM
 
Location: phoenix, az
84 posts, read 52,094 times
Reputation: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by natalayjones View Post
Yes.

That becomes the problem...people think "Oh I can drive home safely. I'm fine." and then they go out and cause accidents.

So for the two times that you were charged with DUI's were you just driving along safely and the police pulled you over for a chit-chat?
I have to answer you on this. Actually I was charged with 2 dui's at the same time. A single arrest, charged with 2 dui's. This may be hard for you to believe but it's true. The police were doing a thing called "cherry picking" where they wait outside of bars and night clubs and when people leave to drive home they follow them and look for probable cause to pull them over. So the officer followed me for almost 1 mile and said he pulled me over for going 50 in a 35 mile an hour zone. He asked me if I had been drinking and I admitted that I had 2 drinks. So he told me to get out of the truck, administered field sobriety test, asked me to blow in a breathalyzer (which I refused to do) and arrested me. I was transported to a DUI Van where my blood was forcefully drawn, and according to the blood test results my BAC was at .087 at the time my blood was drawn. Although I showed no signs of being drunk or impaired I was charged with driving while impaired to the slightest degree, and driving with a BAC of .08 or higher.

The problem with the 2 charges I was charged with is that when the police that made the arrest, and the police that drew my blood in the DUI Van were cross examined by my attorney they could not provide one shred of evidence to prove I was drunk. The problem with the blood test result is, my blood was drawn 1 hour and 3 minutes after I was pulled over by the police. There’s a term called retrograde extrapolation where someone’s BAC is calculated back to what it actually was at the time the person was driving the vehicle. According to the states expert witness the blood test has a 5% error rate, but according to my expert witness the blood test has a 10% error rate. According to experts all over the world the blood test actually does have a 10% error rate. Also, the method the state uses to determine the 5% error rate is to continuously retest blood samples (actually the vapor between the blood and the top of the vial, as they don’t test the true blood) until it shows a 5% error rate. This must be done during inspections so they can continue to receive funding to finance lab operations. When cross examined on how I performed on the field sobriety tests the officer had to admit that the only problem he saw was that I showed nystagmus in my eyes when they moved from side to side during the pen to eye test, but when my eyes moved up and down there was no nystagmus, and my eyes didn’t twitch at all during the test. He saw no issues with the walk and turn test, or the one leg stand test. Also, during the time I spent in the DUI Van, when the alcohol was fully metabolized in my blood stream I showed no signs of being drunk or impaired. The police that drew my blood confirmed that, and admitted that I was extremely polite during the entire process. Oh yeah, I also should inform you that I didn’t resist arrest when the officer arrested me.

I must inform you that to be found not guilty of DUI charges in this day and time is impossible if the evidence shows that you were drunk or even impaired to the slightest degree. The jury consisted of 5 women and 1 man. All 6 members of the jury must return a not guilty verdict for someone to be found not guilty.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2009, 05:09 AM
 
Location: phoenix, az
84 posts, read 52,094 times
Reputation: 13
DUI task force arrests 41 over rodeo weekend

Members of the Southern Arizona DUI Task Force stopped 2,640 vehicles over the rodeo weekend and arrested 41 motorists on suspicion of drunken driving, the task force reported.
The number of vehicles stopped and the number of persons arrested includes 1,243 motorists stopped at a Sheriff's Department DUI checkpoint and the DUI arrests of four of those people, the summary says.
The checkpoint was set up at South Palo Verde Road at the Barraza Aviation Parkway.
There were no DUI-related fatal collisions over the weekend, the task force said.
Officers with the multiagency task force encountered 15 designated drivers.
The task force was on the lookout for drunken drivers Friday night to Saturday morning and Saturday night to Sunday morning.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2009, 05:15 AM
 
Location: phoenix, az
84 posts, read 52,094 times
Reputation: 13
Thousands of Arizona DUI Cases May Be Dismissed Because of the Intoxilyzer 8000

Breath testing equipment used (Intoxilyzer 8000) in cases of DUI in Tucson may be ruled unreliable.
CMI, the manufacturer of the Intoxilyzer 8000, is facing a challenge over the reliability of its equipment that could impact thousands of cases of drunk driving in the Tucson area. The breath test equipment is one of the alcohol detectors used by law enforcement agencies in the state. Arizona DUI defense attorneys have asked for the equipment's source code on behalf over a number of defendants with cases pending before the Pima County Superior Court.
Twelve years ago a similar challenge to another breath testing machine lead to the dismissal of approximately 5,000 cases of drunk driving in Tucson over several months. The Intoxilyzer 8000 offers a portable piece of equipment to test blood alcohol content of motorists suspected of drunk driving. The Intoxilyzer 8000 is used by most law enforcement agencies in Arizona, as well as seven other states and three government agencies.
The source code used in the Intoxilyzer 8000 has come under challenge from several states. The code is changed for each state to reflect local liquor laws and equipment specifications. Since being implemented in Arizona, the approved version of the equipment's code has been changed multiple times. It is feared that errors and code-based assumptions made by the computer could lead to inaccurate BAC readings and thus false charges of DUI. Even CMI has testified that that there are problems with the latest software version. CMI has been ordered buy several courts across the United States to provide the source code of its equipment, but has refused. The company has accumulated more than $1 million in fines in Florida alone for refusing to cooperate with a court order.
Prosecutors defend the equipment, with one Pima County official stating that the software has been tested by the Arizona Department of Public Safety and the federal government “a bazillion times.” Still, many cases of drunk driving have been dismissed because of judges and justices have refused to enter the results of a breath test into evidence. If the Intoxilyzer 8000 is found unreliable in Tucson it could lead to the dismissal of many thousands of DUI cases. The Intoxilyzer 8000 was placed in service in Tucson on December 1, 2006. In all of 2007 and so far this year, Tucson police have charged 5,963 motorists with suspicion of driving under the influence in Arizona.
A county judge has given CMI until November 10 to provide the source code in electronic format.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2009, 05:59 AM
 
Location: phoenix, az
84 posts, read 52,094 times
Reputation: 13
Plan To Get Drunks at Drive-Thrus Falls FlatTucson, AZ – A plan by the Pima County Sheriff’s Department that would have stationed deputies at fast-food joints to sniff out drunken drivers appears to have fallen flat.
The department had hoped to target drunken driving by putting undercover deputies inside 24-hour fast-food restaurants to spot impaired drivers placing their orders. If deputies spotted someone with classic symptoms of impairment, they were to call a uniformed deputy stationed outside to pull the driver over.
But sheriff’s Lt. Karl Woolridge says the department asked various fast-food chains if they’d agree to be a part of the program, but all of them declined.

Hmmm….I can’t imagine why the owners of the chains wouldn’t want cops in their places harrassing their customers. Oh well, back to the drawing board….
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2009, 06:09 AM
 
Location: phoenix, az
84 posts, read 52,094 times
Reputation: 13
Signs of Reason

Posted by Lawrence Taylor on June 10th, 2009
For years I’ve been preaching that the focus of the so-called "war on drunk driving" should be on the problem drinker — the alcoholic with prior convictions and/or very high blood-alcohol levels — rather than on the far more commonly arrested social drinker. See my June, 2006, blog post "Time for a Change". Dealing with the problem drinker is addressing the source of most alcohol-related traffic fatalities; punishing social drinkers is simply a prohibitionist war on alcohol.
Finally, signs that the voices of reason are beginning to be heard over the hysterical screams of Mothers Against Drunk Driving. In today’s Wall Street Journal:

Drunk Driver Data Don’t Walk Straight Line Either
Rarely Do Intoxicated Motorists Get Caught, and When They Do, the Meaning of Blood-Alcohol Levels Is Hazy
What makes a drunken driver really drunk?
That question was highlighted by Mothers Against Drunk Driving’s decision Monday to remove a liquor-industry-funded group from a high-profile campaign to prevent drinkers from taking the wheel. The group, called the Century Council, argues on its Web site that hard-core drunken drivers cause most alcohol-related traffic deaths, and therefore any crackdown should focus on them…
The dispute over crash statistics is complicated by the number universally used to measure drunken driving: blood alcohol content. It is rarely monitored by drivers and poorly understood even by the most sober minds. Despite this confusion and the fuzziness of test results, penalties for drunken driving tend to be more black-and-white than for speeding fines, which increase as speed does.
MADD split with the Century Council because the two groups disagreed about a penalty requiring drivers caught above the limit to install an ignition interlock, a device that prevents those convicted from driving whenever their breath alcohol is too high. The liquor-backed group told several states it only supported this measure for the most hard-core drivers. These include repeat-offenders and people whose blood alcohol content exceeds 0.15 grams per deciliter of blood — a much higher level of alcohol content than the legal limit of 0.08.
The basis for the Century Council’s hard-core threshold comes from government tests of drivers involved in alcohol-related fatal crashes in 2007, showing three out of five had a BAC of at least 0.15.
Other research establishes that these heavy drinkers are far more dangerous than other drunken drivers on the road. Paul Zador, a statistician at the research company Westat, has compared the blood-alcohol levels of drivers killed in crashes with levels of drivers stopped for random roadside testing during peak drunken-driving hours. That helped him estimate how likely it is that an extra drink will prove fatal. Compared with sober drivers, drivers at 0.15 or higher were about 400 times more likely to die in a crash. Drivers with levels between 0.10 and 0.14 were 50 times more likely than sober drivers to die in a crash…
Complicating matters, people’s alcohol-metabolism varies, as does the relationship between their breath alcohol — which is what is usually measured — and their blood alcohol. That has been a favorite line of argument for some defense attorneys. In response, some jurisdictions have based their laws directly on breath-alcohol levels, according to Rankine Forrester, chief executive of Intoximeters Inc., which makes breath-alcohol testers. That solves the legal gray area but creates a scientific one, because intoxication arises from blood alcohol, not breath alcohol.

A hint of reason in all the MADDness…
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2009, 07:43 AM
 
Location: phoenix, az
84 posts, read 52,094 times
Reputation: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greatday View Post
Guilt or innocence is not for the arresting officer to determine.

Their job is to determine if there is a reasonable belief that the accused committed a crime or crimes.

The determination of guilt or innocence is up to the trier of fact.
Yes, I agree that guilt or innocence is not for the arresting officer to determine. Their job has changed from protecting the public from drunk drivers to arresting anyone with the smell of alcohol on their breath. Once an innocent person is accused of driving while impaired to the slightest degree they lose all hope because they think they have no chance to receive a fair trial due to the laws being so tight. On top of that, most people can't afford to pay 15,000 dollars, which has become the going price for a good DUI lawyer nowadays. The system has made it so easy to collect DUI money now because most people plead guilty and never request a trial by jury. With no laws to protect innocent people no wonder police have become so corrupt when it comes to DUI arrests.

Last edited by bransom; 10-11-2009 at 08:10 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:30 AM.

© 2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top