Drinking and driving

[bluesbassdad]

Leif,

I've never attended the Kentucky Bourbon Festival, nor have I ever visited any of the sites in Kentucky that are on your itinerary. However, judging by the comments of others regarding your trip, I believe you will be able to complete your visit without so much as being tempted to drive while intoxicated, even marginally.

Of course in saying that I am assuming that you will be staying at the General Nelson (I believe it is), the site of the glorious gazebo get-togethers. I doubt that anyone has every departed one of those gatherings in a totally sober state. :grin:

In regard to the power (some, no doubt including our own T47, would call it "discretion") given to police officers in regard to DUI, a recent thread here amply demonstrates that Americans are not all of one mind in this matter. Nevertheless, it is better to know the law and how it is enforced than to receive an unpleasant surprise.

Yours truly,

Dave Morefield

[T47]

I have never been to Kentucky, so in reality I have no room to comment. But you might find it interesting.

In WA State all our tests are standardized. Every officer gives the same tests, in the same order. Those tests are as follows:

1) Alphabet (thats just A to Z).

2) Counting backwards from 53 to 36

3) Romberg Balance Test (stand with your feet together eyes closedand estimate 30 seconds-however you want just not counting out loud)

4) Walk and Turn (9 Steps down, turn and 9 steps back heel to toe)

5) 1 leg stand (one leg held up 6" off the ground and maintain balance for 30 seconds.

6) Finger to Nose Test

7) HGN

If you have physical problems or educational issues which make it difficult or impossible to complete the test's the officers I work with will note that.

Of course in that situation, the Officer's discretion will play a much larger role.

If you display enough indicators during these tests you can be arrested for DUI and taken in for a BAC test. If you blow below a .08 you can still be convicted of DUI if your physical tests indicate impairment. Here in WA we have officers trained as Drug Recognition Experts. If you are taken in because of the results of you Field Tests and your BAC test does not indicate the presense of alcohol, they will do further tests in an attempt to determine what drug is possibly impairing you.

When we are working nights, we are watching driving behavior. Statistical studies have been done which indicate what type of driving mistakes can be indications of intoxication, and those officers who are really trained, probably are very aware of those percentages and will look for them.

This site has some interesting information.

I will not try and defend the actions of my Brothers and Sisters in Blue across the nation, I know like in any profession there are good and bad. But "in my experience" we are not out there trying to drum up stats, we are trying to protect the public and do a good job. I am sure there are horror stories out there of bad cops, but I do like to think they are few and far between.

As I stated in the other thread, these arrests are the most time consuming technical arrests we make. 12 page reports that will take the "expert" officer almost 4 hours to complete.

In the end, the scientific validity of these tests is something for the lawyers to argue. I can speak directly to the DUI officers I currently work with, and in their experience the tests provide a fair indication of intoxication and they believe in them.

I have no idea how the Bourbon Fest works, but I guess I might expect that during a celebration like that, there might be the likelyhood that the percentge of impaired drivers might increase, like on New Years Eve...or during our home NFL Seahawk games. And I would'nt be surprised if patrols for that are increased...but you folks back there know much better than I out here.

:toast:

[nor02lei]

I have never been to Kentucky, so in reality I have no room to comment. But you might find it interesting.

In WA State all our tests are standardized. Every officer gives the same tests, in the same order. Those tests are as follows:

1) Alphabet (thats just A to Z).

2) Counting backwards from 53 to 36

3) Romberg Balance Test (stand with your feet together eyes closedand estimate 30 seconds-however you want just not counting out loud)

4) Walk and Turn (9 Steps down, turn and 9 steps back heel to toe)

5) 1 leg stand (one leg held up 6" off the ground and maintain balance for 30 seconds.

6) Finger to Nose Test

7) HGN

If you have physical problems or educational issues which make it difficult or impossible to complete the test's the officers I work with will note that.

Of course in that situation, the Officer's discretion will play a much larger role.

If you display enough indicators during these tests you can be arrested for DUI and taken in for a BAC test. If you blow below a .08 you can still be convicted of DUI if your physical tests indicate impairment. Here in WA we have officers trained as Drug Recognition Experts. If you are taken in because of the results of you Field Tests and your BAC test does not indicate the presense of alcohol, they will do further tests in an attempt to determine what drug is possibly impairing you.

When we are working nights, we are watching driving behavior. Statistical studies have been done which indicate what type of driving mistakes can be indications of intoxication, and those officers who are really trained, probably are very aware of those percentages and will look for them.

This site has some interesting information.

I will not try and defend the actions of my Brothers and Sisters in Blue across the nation, I know like in any profession there are good and bad. But "in my experience" we are not out there trying to drum up stats, we are trying to protect the public and do a good job. I am sure there are horror stories out there of bad cops, but I do like to think they are few and far between.

As I stated in the other thread, these arrests are the most time consuming technical arrests we make. 12 page reports that will take the "expert" officer almost 4 hours to complete.

In the end, the scientific validity of these tests is something for the lawyers to argue. I can speak directly to the DUI officers I currently work with, and in their experience the tests provide a fair indication of intoxication and they believe in them.

I have no idea how the Bourbon Fest works, but I guess I might expect that during a celebration like that, there might be the likelyhood that the percentge of impaired drivers might increase, like on New Years Eve...or during our home NFL Seahawk games. And I would'nt be surprised if patrols for that are increased...but you folks back there know much better than I out here.

:toast:

Todd,

Thank you very much for your â€inside†information. It’s a relief to here that the officers have trained on this field and especially that physical problems and educational issues are considered. In my case the later is real important due to the fact that I haven’t learned how to spell out the letters one by one and I got slight balance problems due to the fact that my right lower leg are partly paralysed.

Leif

[T47]

No problem at all. I envy all of you the good time you are going to have. One day I will be back there.

It's not really insider information, NHTSA trys to improve traffic safety and I believe they are the driving force behnd the standardized tests. I don't know how a small agency handles the man power issue for DUI arrests?

And just in case it has not been beat to death enough, am sure it is way more information that most people want to work through but the NHTSA site has some interesting information on the topic here.

Have a great visit and a great time.

:toast:

[Russellc]

Hey...Dim your headlights at night...

Not long ago a Kentucky State Trooper pulled me over because I didn't dim my headlights...The first question I asked him (in a very upleasant tone) what have I done wrong for you to make a U-turn in the middle of the road to pull me over?...He told me that the first signal of a drunk driver was the "lights dim" issue...He could smell the bourbon reeking from my clothes. He asked if I had been drinking? All the while he was shinning a flashlight in my face!...Very, very close to my face!

I told him exactly what I thought. I vented my opinion about driving that road all these years and some of the stuff I have witnessed, with no law in sight late night!...Mind you, I was so pissed off that I wanted to smack that young man!

Rest assured...If you are guilty, you will pay the price. If you are innocent, you walk away...even if you reek of bourbon (as I did that night) you won't go to jail.

If you don't drink and drive, you are safe.

We all are :grin: :grin: :grin:

To make a long story short.

Dim you lights :grin: :grin: :grin:

Bettye Jo

I know this is an old thread, but I figure many people scan this when thinking about tours. I am a defense attorney and have done thousands of DUI cases over the years. My experience is, if you smell of alcohol, you may end up posting bond! I can not tell you how many people I have gotten cases dismissed for who were arrested for blows as low as .04%!!!

It happened to a very good of mine, she called from a sobriety check point and assured me she only had 1 drink, and dinner too so I deviated from my usual advice and told her to blow. she called me back and said they had her license and keys in an envelope and were saying "they had a keeper". I personally drove to the location and explained to the officer that the blow was way to low, and they agreed not to file if I drove her home. I inquired what they used as "impaired"? When asked to do the walk heel to toe, she walked literally putting her heel down first, rolling to the toe, rather than like you were on a rope walk!

Use a designated driver...if you have been drinking at all, you are likely to get arrested....most officers dont want to let you go...if they do, and you just happen to get in an accident, its their ass, just because of appearances. Much easier to haul you in and let your lawyer win in court.

russellc

[jeff]

Sage advice.

[ILLfarmboy]

About three years ago the wife and I were driving through a small town near home. She was on her cell phone with her brother. As we approached the next speed limit drop from 45 to 35 going into town I pulled off to the side of the road because we would soon be loosing cell reception. As my wife was wrapping up her conversation, a cop, who had been sitting in his cruiser up ahead (about 200 yards or so) whipped out onto the road and came our way, passed us then whipped a U-turn and came up behind us with his lights on. I thought: What the HELL!

I asked "what's the problem officer". His response: "How much have you had to drink tonight?" None. What is in the glass in the cup holder he asked. Diet Coke I said. This is the real strange part. He asked rather gruffly, Why Diet Coke? (never been able the figure that one out)

After detaining us for some time (running my license and registration etc. he let us go without apologizing for his gruff accusatory tone or a single explanation.

I don't know how old he was but he was very young. He didn't look old enough to shave let alone be a cop. I have found the young ones tend to be the worst. They have something to prove, or they are scared/ unsure of themselves so they overcompensate by being bullying.

21 is too young to be a police officer. Not enough life experience. Or the maturity to use discretion wisely.

[Virus_Of_Life]

21 is too young to be a police officer. Not enough life experience. Or the maturity to use discretion wisely.

You got that right!!!

[Hyperspace]

If you think 21 is too young to work at the police department, then do you also think it’s too young to serve in the military and risk getting your ass blown off?

[gr8erdane]

Not to belittle your ideology, but there is a big difference between a 21 year old soldier and a 21 year old police officer. Few 21 year old soldiers are in a position where they have to make decisions on their own. They are trained to follow the orders given them as part of the parameters of a given mission. A 21 year old police officer however is usually on his own and has to make split second decisions that effect many lives. I'm not saying that being 21 makes them bad police officers but I'd prefer that a more veteran and mature officer make the decisions that could mean the difference between life and death.

[ILLfarmboy]

Not to belittle your ideology, but there is a big difference between a 21 year old soldier and a 21 year old police officer. Few 21 year old soldiers are in a position where they have to make decisions on their own. They are trained to follow the orders given them as part of the parameters of a given mission. A 21 year old police officer however is usually on his own and has to make split second decisions that effect many lives. I'm not saying that being 21 makes them bad police officers but I'd prefer that a more veteran and mature officer make the decisions that could mean the difference between life and death.

I couldn't have said it better myself, Dane.

I'd also like to add. In a war with a (hopefully) clearly defined enemy and generous rules of engagement there is little or no "grey area". In civilian life there is a LOT of "grey area" and we give police the discretion they need. Trusting they use this discretion wisely.

[Hyperspace]

Not to belittle your ideology

I did not insert an ideology...I never said I felt one way or the other. It was just a question.