I wouldn't drive if I consumed a teaspoon of alcohol. It's just not worth it to me, so I don't do it. But this is offensive, because the police can insist on this test not because you've driven erratically, not because you smell of alcohol, but just because you have the misfortune or bad timing to drive through the stupid checkpoint. I consider my bodily fluids and vapors to be my private property. I'm not so ready to offer them up without probable cause for the greater good. To me, it's not about whether or not you have anything to hide.

I've never thought about my bodily fluids, in this manner. I'm not opposed, to sharing them upon a reasonable request.

 

If a checkpoint saves "1", just one potential driver, than could have the disposition or cause an accident to themselves or others....nothing wrong with that, in my book and I say "well done".

You are incorrect. One beer has an effect. Maybe minimal, but an effect. I guess one needs to learn the hard way before they believe me. But, you don't have to be legally drunk to cause great harm.

 

0 tolerence.

OK, since you feel this way you must also think that you should not be allowed to have cell phones, radios, CD players or anything that could cause you to have an accident. One beer does not impair anyone, I doubt it even slow your reflexes in the very least.

OK, since you feel this way you must also think that you should not be allowed to have cell phones, radios, CD players or anything that could cause you to have an accident. One beer does not impair anyone, I doubt it even slow your reflexes in the very least.

 

 

Non-negotiable to me. 0 tolerance.

 

And, you are incorrect that it doesn't impair.

OK, since you feel this way you must also think that you should not be allowed to have cell phones, radios, CD players or anything that could cause you to have an accident. One beer does not impair anyone, I doubt it even slow your reflexes in the very least.

Could 1 beer, effect a small petite, young driver whom is not used ot or never has, consumed alcohol.

 

Since it's absorbed into the bloodstream, I can instances where it could.

I've never thought about my bodily fluids, in this manner. I'm not opposed, to sharing them upon a reasonable request.

 

If a checkpoint saves "1", just one potential driver, than could have the disposition or cause an accident to themselves or others....nothing wrong with that, in my book and I say "well done".

You keep bring the checkpoint up as if that's what the problem is, forget the checkpoint, it's not about that and you know it. They have no right to take your blood on suspicion alone, it's just that simple.

Could 1 beer, effect a small petite, young driver whom is not used ot or never has, consumed alcohol.

 

Since it's absorbed into the bloodstream, I can instances where it could.

I would say no, there isn't enough alcohol in one beer. You'd have to show me some pretty hardcore proof of that.

You keep bring the checkpoint up as if that's what the problem is, forget the checkpoint, it's not about that and you know it. They have no right to take your blood on suspicion alone, it's just that simple.

Now you're telling me, what I know. Interesting and again, usually a request for such a test, has some justification.

Non-negotiable to me. 0 tolerance.

 

And, you are incorrect that it doesn't impair.

Show me the proof.

 

You didn't answer the rest of the question. Are you OK with banning all those other things for the sake of safety?

Now you're telling me, what I know. Interesting and again, usually a request for such a test, has some justification.

Well if you don't know by now since I've told you several times then you simply aren't reading my posts.

Their justification is you refuse the breathalyser.

Non-negotiable to me. 0 tolerance.

 

And, you are incorrect that it doesn't impair.

 

What do you think is responsible for more accidents?

 

A. 1 beer

B. cell phones

C. Music

Only if you refuse the breathalizer.

 

But why shouldn't I refuse the breathalyzer? I already said I don't ever drink and drive. And we are talking about a checkpoint, not about being pulled over for suspicion of drinking and driving. Those are two very different situations. Why should I take a breathalyzer just because the police at a checkpoint ask me to?

Well if you don't know by now since I've told you several times then you simply aren't reading my posts.

Their justification is you refuse the breathalyser.

Oh I'm reading your posts and those of others. Because I take a different position than you, doesn't make either of us correct but I'm basing my opinion, on my personal feelings.

 

You say it bothers you, I say it doesn't bother me. Simple, isn't it.

Show me the proof.

 

You didn't answer the rest of the question. Are you OK with banning all those other things for the sake of safety?

 

 

Immediate physical effects of alcohol can happen ten minutes after drinking begins

 

1. Reduced Inhibitions - consuming alcohol changes behavior. At a blood alcohol level of 0.05, the drinker's behavior begins to change and be noticable. Physical effects of alcohol and reduced inhibitions can mean the drinker becomes more likely to engage in activities they would otherwise not participate in like sexual activity, continued drinking, drinking and driving or illegal drug use

 

http://ezinearticles.com/?Physical-Effects-of-Alcohol---7-Short-Term-Effects-of-Alcohol-Consumption&id=131378

But why shouldn't I refuse the breathalyzer? I already said I don't ever drink and drive. And we are talking about a checkpoint, not about being pulled over for suspicion of drinking and driving. Those are two very different situations. Why should I take a breathalyzer just because the police at a checkpoint ask me to?

Not to mention the breathalyser could give a false reading. Guess what happens then?

Oh I'm reading your posts and those of others. Because I take a different position than you, doesn't make either of us correct but I'm basing my opinion, on my personal feelings.

 

You say it bothers you, I say it doesn't bother me. Simple, isn't it.

Yeah it is, so? I didn't say you had to agree with me, did I?