• ImplyingImplications
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    7 months ago

    I really don’t so how this can be abused. You blow into the device and it reads out how much alcohol is in your breath. It takes seconds to do and cops can’t discover anything else about you other than how much alcohol is in your breath. It’s nothing like searching your home. It provides police with less information about you than your licence does, which cops can check anytime.

    • thesporkeffect@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      The breathalyzer isn’t the problem. It’s a free pretextual stop where they can look inside your car and decide if they want to hassle you over something else

      • Baggins [he/him]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        They don’t need a reason to stop you when you’re driving. It’s a regulated activity and you’re required to be licensed. They can stop you to check your license just because they feel like it.

      • ImplyingImplications
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        7 months ago

        If you have something in your car that could give police reason to hassle you over, the pretextual stop was probably worth it. I get that police stopping drivers is annoying, and ACAB, but having to prove you aren’t drunk while driving is already a thing in Ontario. RIDE Programs are literal police checkpoints where you need to prove you aren’t drunk to pass through. That is already a thing and has been for years. I’ve yet to see any serious complaints about it or police abusing it to hassle people.

        • thesporkeffect@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Untrue. If you are a class of person that that the police are interested in harassing, they only need an excuse to look around legally. Powdered donut residue, dirt, just a “suspicious smell” that has no need to be proven is enough to ruin your life even if you are eventually vindicated. There’s a reason stop and frisk is no longer official policy in NYC

          • ImplyingImplications
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            But this isn’t stop and frisk. You’ve already been stopped. The policy is that everyone who gets stopped gets a breathalyzer. There’s literally no way this can be used to hassle you any further than you’ve already been hassled. You’ve already been pulled over. If cops want to hassle you for donut powder they already can without the breathalyzer bit. This doesn’t change when cops can pull you over.

        • Yezzey
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          They absolutely abuse it! See how many ride stops they do when someone is at large in the city. They throw them up under the guise of a ride program when searching for someone. I have heard them doing this on police scanner. If you had access to the data I’m sure you could prove this…

    • Grabthar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      But it doesn’t read BAC. It just detects organic compounds with methyl groups and the courts assume it is alcohol. That’s usually a pretty safe bet if the person is also clearly inebriated. But now people who work with organic chemicals either at home or at work could get charged even with 0 actual BAC. Paint your bathroom with oil paint and have toluene in your system? Believe it or not, straight to jail.

      • ImplyingImplications
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Youre right! That’s why if someone blows high on a roadside test they will be taken to the station and tested again multiple times over a longer period of time using a more sensitive device. Roadside tests aren’t admissible in court as evidence and are only used as probable cause to force someone to take the real test at the station. Nobody is going to jail because they used mouthwash before driving.

        • Grabthar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          The device at the police station works no differently than the roadside one. It is just considered more accurate in that it gives a number value to represent the estimated percentage of alcohol in your blood, based on the concentration of VOCs in your breath that have methyl groups. Roadside only does pass/fail/warn. The only way to actually know what is present in your system is a blood test. People don’t normally get breathalyzers unless there is a reason for it, even at RIDE checkpoints so yes, we may introduce a possibility of incriminating someone based on the results of a breathalyzer test alone. Unless we just stick to probable cause.