Laird Lugton Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 This evening as I left the airport car park at the barriers were 3 policeman who pulled me aside for no apparent reason. I was asked to give a sample of my breath which came back zero. I always thought they had to give a reason or suspect someone of drinking driving for wanting to breathalyse an individual? Or is random breath testing now the norm? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evo Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 dont think they need a reason,,and good on them, drink driving kills, the law should be if you have one drink you do not drive Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holly Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 no reason needed if you had said no you would have been arrested Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pimpkiller Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 airports are really bad for silly people drinking too much and I can understand them checking there. A few year back an old woman seated at the front of the plane got so drunk she passed out and peed herself and had to be stretchered off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laird Lugton Posted December 22, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 I do and I don't have a problem with it. On the one hand if I have done nothing wrong they have no right to interrupt my evening. On the other hand drink driving kills and the more nutters put behind bars the better. However I was just curious as to the grounds for administering it. When he saw me in my pilot's uniform he said "guess you haven't had a drink then"! I suppose they are waiting for all the people who have been down south at social functions for Christmas.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clakk Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 i dont think they need a reason anymore just routine checks.im glad they do i spent 6 years in germany and some of them at a transport unit workshops and anyone who has scraped the victims of drink driving off the autobahn knows its mental to drink/drive .here abouts over 1000 peeps been done by notts police already this year frightening facts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debaser Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 In England (not sure about Scotland) the police are not allowed to to Random testing. They can do road side tests after, a accident, a moving traffic offence or if they have suspicion. Reckon they were being a bit naughty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbiep Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 If they were carrying out an 'intelligence led' set of testing (people coming from that car park last year had been drinking, etc) then they can test on the 'reasonable suspicion' side of things. Failing which, one of them can always say that you seemed to take a little bit of time to find your keys, get the vehicle started, and that gave them reasonable grounds to test you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mossy835 Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 good thing keep drunks off the road, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drayman Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 (edited) You should try Australia. 2 years ago we were at the Hanging Rock races. Every road away from the race course had a random stop, and that included the dirt road which folks use to avoid the police! We were there for 5 weeks over Christmas and in that time we had 4 random stops but, they stop everyone. In one place you left the motorway on a down ramp to go under the road - under the bridge was a random checkpoint. So just when folks had thought they had made it out of the city and in to the country - gotcha! The Aussies just seem to take it in their stride. Mind you, their roadside adverts are more to the point. One bill board read, "if you drink and drive you're bl--dy stupid". Probably should have said ....bl--dy dangerous! Edited December 22, 2012 by WVAM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 (edited) In England (not sure about Scotland) the police are not allowed to to Random testing. They can do road side tests after, a accident, a moving traffic offence or if they have suspicion. Reckon they were being a bit naughty. Correct but they only have to say "we think you may have been drinking" and the stop/ test is not random! that and having committed a traffic offence or having been involved in an accident are the official reasons for a stop / breath test. KW Edited December 22, 2012 by kdubya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchieboy Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 No matter if they have any reason to believe you have been drinking of not I am in favour of them testing at random. I have no time whatsoever for anyone that drinks and drives and anyone that does deserve to get caught and then have the maximum penalty thrown at them. If random breath tests save just one life then they are worth it - You never know, it might be one of your own families lives that get saved! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKPoacher Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 Police should have 'reasonable suspicion' to ask you to give a breath test. So, if they stop you for a dodgy light and smell alcohol then that is 'reasonable suspicion'. But, what happens at this time of year is an organised campaign where officers are tasked to and put under pressure to stop and test as many motorists as possible. No reasonable suspicion required, just stop everything. I refused to do it, not because I am anti-drink driving, far from it, but because it is breaking the law to stop motorists and ask them to give a sample without 'reasonable suspicion'. If the police can't obey the law then they have no right to prosecute others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tug Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 It's like stop and search though. If the Chief Constable has deemed it relevant, they can increase the frequency and lower the suspicion threshold. It's reasonable to suspect that at this time of year, anyone leaving an establishment with an alcohol licence may have had a drink, even if it's "just the one". Few years ago in Bangor the reasonable suspicion was "leaving town in a car" and every road out had a Police checkpoint. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guest1957 Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 Few years ago in Bangor the reasonable suspicion was "leaving town in a car" and every road out had a Police checkpoint. To be honest that isn't really reasonable suspicion. I'm all for testing, as long as it is within the law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchieboy Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 Police should have 'reasonable suspicion' to ask you to give a breath test. So, if they stop you for a dodgy light and smell alcohol then that is 'reasonable suspicion'. But, what happens at this time of year is an organised campaign where officers are tasked to and put under pressure to stop and test as many motorists as possible. No reasonable suspicion required, just stop everything. I refused to do it, not because I am anti-drink driving, far from it, but because it is breaking the law to stop motorists and ask them to give a sample without 'reasonable suspicion'. If the police can't obey the law then they have no right to prosecute others. I think that this is where you and I are just having to differ on opinions my friend. I do not claim to know the legal standing of random breath tests but if it takes any these irresponsible idiots off the road that think it is fine to risk other peoples lives by drinking and driving then I say good luck to the police for doing it. You never know, it might even be your life or the life of one of your loved ones that the police who carry out these random breath tests are unknowingly saving! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artschool Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 Police should have 'reasonable suspicion' to ask you to give a breath test. So, if they stop you for a dodgy light and smell alcohol then that is 'reasonable suspicion'. But, what happens at this time of year is an organised campaign where officers are tasked to and put under pressure to stop and test as many motorists as possible. No reasonable suspicion required, just stop everything. I refused to do it, not because I am anti-drink driving, far from it, but because it is breaking the law to stop motorists and ask them to give a sample without 'reasonable suspicion'. If the police can't obey the law then they have no right to prosecute others. agree Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bi9johnny Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 Two nights every week I go collect my wife from the hostel she works in at 2am and every now and then I get a pull and every now and then I get a breath test even though I rarely drink and never on these nights but to be quite honest I welcome it as it proves to people they are not sitting down the prom snoozing in the police car and they are out and about keeping an eye on things Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muggins. Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 Police should have 'reasonable suspicion' to ask you to give a breath test. So, if they stop you for a dodgy light and smell alcohol then that is 'reasonable suspicion'. But, what happens at this time of year is an organised campaign where officers are tasked to and put under pressure to stop and test as many motorists as possible. No reasonable suspicion required, just stop everything. I refused to do it, not because I am anti-drink driving, far from it, but because it is breaking the law to stop motorists and ask them to give a sample without 'reasonable suspicion'. If the police can't obey the law then they have no right to prosecute others. What happened when you refused? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopDown Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 As stated there are a few ways that are lawful for requiring a specimen of breath. Suspicion of drinking is quite loose. Swerving, late decision making, no indications etc may provide enough suspicion. Not sure about people routinely driving out of an airport though. That said my viewpoint is on the law in England & Wales. Not 100% on whether Scotland differs at all. Police should have 'reasonable suspicion' to ask you to give a breath test. So, if they stop you for a dodgy light and smell alcohol then that is 'reasonable suspicion'. But, what happens at this time of year is an organised campaign where officers are tasked to and put under pressure to stop and test as many motorists as possible. No reasonable suspicion required, just stop everything. I refused to do it, not because I am anti-drink driving, far from it, but because it is breaking the law to stop motorists and ask them to give a sample without 'reasonable suspicion'. If the police can't obey the law then they have no right to prosecute others. Not sure why you would feel the need to refuse. Just stop the one committing offences. There are so many you needn't waste your time pulling over the law-abiding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeds chimp Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 I use to get pulled all the time in Leeds as was driving home from work between 3am and 6am...14 times in two weeks with 3 times in one night.....by the 3rd time that night I was annoyed... I admit to having drove 3 times when I was over in over 8 years of driving and to me thats 3 times too many and they were stupid mistakes...ok I "got away" with it but thats not the point....its something I will not do again I am in two minds about the "random" stops...I am in favour if it stops people drink driving and taking that car off the road...100 yards down the road it could crash into someone etc....on the other hand it tarring all drivers with the same brush Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bedwards1966 Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 (edited) They can stop and check anyone. They may need to have reasonable suspicion, but unfortunately you will never win that one. At the end of the day it comes down to your word against the police, who will find some reason to say they had suspicion - too fast, too slow, poor signals, wandering etc. There may be no truth in it, but they will easily invent a reason as to why they had reasonable suspicions for any stop. Personally I don't like the police targeting motorists, I feel they need to leave them alone and go and catch some real criminals, and I hate to be pestered and inconvenienced by checks. However, when drink driving is concerned I don't have an issue with it, as in my opinion it's stupid to drink anything and drive (never mind being under the limit, any effects your judgement). Quite simply if people are stupid enough to have a drink knowing it's illegal and dangerous, and drive with it in the system either that night or the following morning then I feel they deserve all that comes their way. The only thing I would ask of the police doing these random checks is that they are quick, efficient, courteous and sensible. Once they've established you're all legal they need to move on, not keep delaying you as I once had with them repeating stupid irrelevant questions and delaying me for no reason. That's the kind of thing that leaves a bad taste in the mouth, quick sensible checks are fine. Edited December 22, 2012 by bedwards1966 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laird Lugton Posted December 22, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 If random breath tests save just one life then they are worth it - You never know, it might be one of your own families lives that get saved! By that logic we should ban all guns! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bullet1747 Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 Can't see a problem with random they should do every where Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cookoff013 Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 never been breathalysed yet. but i never drink and drive, never. i knew someone who got done for being silly. caught over the limit. lost his job and licence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.