It’s Just A Decimal Point: The Dirty Secret Behind Breathalyzers
In 1990, the New Jersey courts declared that the science was settled, the debate was over: breath analysis is a reliable and accurate means by which to determine blood alcohol content (BAC). This proclamation is known as the “Downie decision.”
The lead witness, who held the most sway in the court’s opinion, was Dr. Dubowski, a forensic scientist with a history of research experience dealing with Breathalyzers and alcohol breath analysis. A study he published in 1985 was considered the pre-eminent work in this field.
The Downie case revolved around the accuracy of breath analysis in terms of serving as a surrogate for actual BAC. One aspect would be of particular importance from the defendant’s perspective; how often does the alcohol breath analysis regimen overstate actual BAC?
Dr. Dubowski testified that his research determined that in only 2.3 percent of the tests did the breath reading overstate the actual BAC. This was the first time this number was made publicly available; it had not been presented in his 1985 report.
Another witness in the Downie case, Dr. Gerald Simpson, a physical chemist also testified, and attempted to describe the variables that could render a Breathalyzer reading inaccurate. The court largely disregarded his testimony in favor of the assured endorsement of breath analysis offered by Dr. Dubowski.
The court determined that the use of breath alcohol was scientifically valid for the purpose of determining BAC. Was that the end of the story? Not quite.
After the Downie trial, Dr. Simpson obtained the actual data from Dr. Dubowski’s 1985 report. In applying the same analysis to the data that Dr. Dubowski used, Dr. Simpson discovered a major error. The incidences when breath analysis overstated actual BAC were not 2.3 percent of the tests, as Dr. Dubowski had testified to in the Downie case, but rather 23 percent of the tests – a wandering decimal point!
Dr. Simpson then published his findings in a respected scientific journal. They were never rebutted and Dr. Dubowski remained silent on the subject.
Attorneys across the country have taken note of the breathalyzer’s failings. This has lead authorities to resort to more invasive measures, including letting officers perform blood draws with very little training.
Recent research proves that measuring breath to determine actual BAC is a horrendously flawed concept. Errors can approach 50 percent! Still, even 15 years ago it was known and could be proven that in almost one quarter of Breathalyzer tests the readings were higher than the actual BAC.
How many thousands of people had their lives turned upside down, suffered major financial losses, lost jobs, and had their reputations destroyed by a system that used junk science to push its agenda?
Other Related Articles
To change the picture next to your comments, sign up at Gravatar.com. Each picture is associated with a particular email address. (This is a third-party service not affiliated with NMA.)
Nicely put Andrew
Joe,
You are really started to show the true color of your wool..
Joe writes “I know what I know and I don’t need you to tell me otherwise.”
But you don’t Joe, you don’t know anything…You just told us “Well Phil I don’t have the time, inclination, or see the fruitfulness of this debate. I don’t have the time to look up all the material and websites that contradict much of your ink.”
You haven’t looked up anything, researched anything, or tried to find the entire truth about what you have been commenting on, You read what the N.M.A. wrote here and you RAN with it.
You haven’t looked up anything because you don’t have the inclination to, You haven’t studied any reports because you don’t have the time.
You just showed exactly what I was talking about, not doing any research for yourself…just following blindly like sheep.
Please Joe, I mean this sincerely, here are some rules that you can follow throughout your entire life.
1) Take a moment to think and know what you are commenting on before you comment.
2) Don’t believe EVERYTHING you read.
3) If it’s to good to be true, it probably isn’t true.
4) Don’t talk out your A$$, people will smell it quick.
See ya..Joe..BAAAAHHHHH
Joe writes(Well Phil I don’t have the time, inclination, or see the fruitfulness of this debate. I don’t have the time to look up all the material and websites that contradict much of your ink. Has nothing to do with who’s right or wrong. I know what I know and I don’t need you to tell me otherwise.
In fact I’m not sure what the purpose of any of this is because I seriously doubt you’ve changed anyone’s mind so I don’t see the objective. Your arrogance is itself is enough to turn off most folks. We will simply have to agree to disagree. And Andrew, drink some more of Phils Kool-aid)
My purpose was to try to open your eyes so that you’ll read about both sides and make an itelligent decision rather than believing everything that is printed here for you that so conveniently lays out that there is a gov’t conspiracy against drivers. If you wish to not read the other side and have a predetermined view then by all means move on. But then you can’t blame anyone but yourself when it turns on you!
Phil if your purpose was to open my eyes, you have been successful. The last few months I’ve been busy writing my legislators instead of blogging. Now that our state legislative session is finished for the year I have a little bit more time to monitor these blogs. Turning your attention to your favorite legislator instead of blogging is something all of you should be doing. Putting it more bluntly, wagging your mouths on the Internet will not change anything. Writing your elected representatives might. The rogue, misguided law enforcement, and revenue generating efforts of municipalites of the world love you for staying disengaged from the political arena. If you agree with Phil than stay disengaged. They’ve learned the fruitfulness of political involvement, you the sheepeaples haven’t. They all have legislative agenda’s and lobbyist to push them. Whose lobbying on your behalf? So it’s pretty much a forgone conclusion that laws have been and will continue to be passed that are beneficial to them and that generally means your on the losing end (not a conspiracy Phil).
Phil, you and I, as well as many others have a fundamental disagreement and that’s fair. But Andrews character assassination does nothing for his credibility. Both of you can totally discount my views. That’s obviously your prerogative but I believe I hold the popular view. Pretty much everything you have stated about me is incorrect but the issue is not about me.
I don’t think your eyes are open Joe. I doubt you did anything other than activly lobby for the bad information that the NMA has filled your head with. Things like “Attorneys across the country have taken note of the breathalyzer’s failings. This has lead authorities to resort to more invasive measures, including letting officers perform blood draws with very little training.” From the article above. Every scientific instrument has faults when operated incorrectly. The NMA purposely misdirects, misinterprets and misinforms on this issue. I challenge you to quote 1 municipality that is allowing untrained officers perform blood draws of suspected DUI offenders. When you can’t I then extend the challenge that you quote 1 municipality that is actively pursuing legislation that will allow this. Stating things like this on this blog is nothing more than a scare tactic designed to enrage the public into supporting the NMA.
Well Phil I don’t have the time, inclination, or see the fruitfulness of this debate. I don’t have the time to look up all the material and websites that contradict much of your ink. Has nothing to do with who’s right or wrong. I know what I know and I don’t need you to tell me otherwise.
In fact I’m not sure what the purpose of any of this is because I seriously doubt you’ve changed anyone’s mind so I don’t see the objective. Your arrogance is itself is enough to turn off most folks. We will simply have to agree to disagree. And Andrew, drink some more of Phils Kool-aid
Andrew writes(You know, it REALLY sounds like we should be taking Phil very seriously. It seems like he is the only one on this entire site that has read the entire transcript of Dr Dubowski testimony.
Maybe we should ALL read it instead of following blindly like dumb sheep.
I believe Phil is the only educated one on this site, not because he has the gift of intelligence but because he took the time not to be a sheep.
Keep giving them the truth Phil, they can’t stand that…lol
See you….BAAAAHHHHHHH)
Andrew I have not had the opportunity to read the actual transcript of the Downie trial or the Decision rendered. I have been unable to locate either online. However I have read the Report by Dubowski that is referenced above It doesn’t even come close to saying what the NMA claims if you read it in it’s entirety. You can however misinterpret parts of it if they are quoted out of context. All I am trying to accomplish is to give the people who are intelligent enough, the opportunity to make a well informed decision rather than following blindly like sheep because they are anti-authoritarian.
You know, it REALLY sounds like we should be taking Phil very seriously. It seems like he is the only one on this entire site that has read the entire transcript of Dr Dubowski testimony.
Maybe we should ALL read it instead of following blindly like dumb sheep.
I believe Phil is the only educated one on this site, not because he has the gift of intelligence but because he took the time not to be a sheep.
Keep giving them the truth Phil, they can’t stand that…lol
See you….BAAAAHHHHHHH
hah, phil is laughing that y’all are taking him seriously.
people people…will you stop feeding the dullard and ignore him so he will go somewhere else to hear himself talk in between having his crack filled in.
Joe writes(I never said they were ALL corrupt. I never said we didn’t need traffic control, I never said we didn’t need speed enforcement.)
Then maybe you could present your case more clearly.
I thought it was you that said that the motivation of officers issuing speeding tickets was monetary and I believe someone else actually used the word greed in thier post. Accusing officers of monetary motivations to write tickets is corruption although you never actually said the words corrupt or corruption in your posts.
If you feel that traffic control is needed please outline for us the circumstances under which you feel traffic control is needed.
If you feel that speed limits and speed enforcement are needed then outline the circumstances you feel both are appropriate.
be prepared for my response though because I intend to tell you where I agree and disagree and why I agree or disagree.
Why don’t you also add something in your reply that is on topic like your views on current DUI/DWI laws. Where and when you feel they should be enforced, how vigorously and methods of enforcement.
Joe writes(First Phil, I threw the ice chest story in to lighten up the debate a little and you took advantage of it to throw it back in my face.)First, I never said they were ALL corrupt. I never said we didn’t need traffic control, I never said we didn’t need speed enforcement. Having said that, I do have serious problems with the over all system….in this state.)
You guys are all the same you imply that the cops are corrupt and laws are wrong but when called to task on it you claim I never said that that they were ALL corrupt.
Joe writes(As for running for public office to change laws and policy, you know that’s a safe thing for you to say. That’s one of the firsts things a cop would say for the very same reason. I’ve explained all this in great detail in past posts. You and Randy are so uncompromising. You can’t debate with a brick wall.)
If by uncompromising you mean poking holes in your stories or pointing out flaws in it then I guess you could say I am uncompromising to those who feel that I should heed thier words as gospel when in fact my education and experience tell me that there is something wrong with what they are saying. You present as if you are presenting evidence in a case against authority but when I the jury request more information for clarification or point out inaccuracies you treat me like I am not the jury you are trying to convince but part of the authority you hate so much.
Donleedon writes(Well, if I had a scanner, I could send you the copies of the reports… you know what I could keep going with the rest of this, but hey, like I said before, it is pointless… You are once again mixing up what I have said, etc… Doesn’t really surprise me.
You are right Phil, no one has ever been innocent of a crime but found guilty. An old saying comes to mind, something about arguing with fools or something or other.
However, one very last thing… if you had read more of the articles (you don’t even have to read Lawrence Taylor’s commentaries) on a certain website, you would know that the Supreme Court doesn’t care about any one’s constitutional rights in regard to DWI, and I don’t have that kind of money. Peace out and keep those eyes closed, while half reading posts.)
I will take this post to mean that you didn’t appeal and that you didn’t hire an attorney to sue because your civil rights were violated. I just don’t get you guys you refuse to actually try to make changes yet you complain about the way it is. My name appears in case law because I wasn’t affraid to make a change when my Wife’s civil rights were violated. Keep complaining on blogs amybe someday someone who can make a change will read your plight. BTW you don’t need money to sue for civil rights violations it works very much like personal Injury law, where the lawyer gets a cut of what you recover.
What did I mix up? Maybe you can lay it out and give me a clearer picture. I am not saying that it is impossible for an innocent person to be accused and convicted of a crime they didn’t commit. However, what would the statistical possibility be that a single person be accused of two separate crimes and be innocent of both? Where is James Young when you need him to layout statistical possibilities anyway?
Phil says (I don’t have a problem with the DUIBLOG they are doing exactly what I’d expect them to be doing there The DUI Lawyer is looking to increase his client list by telling those who have been arrested for DUI that the laws are wrong, the scientific instrument is fault ect ect.).
Joe replies(It sounds to me like you have a problem with them. You just stated it. If your so knowledgeable, you should be able to present you argument quite adequately. You seem to dominate this blog so well. What’s the difference? Go over there and try your hand.)
That I disagree with them does not mean I have a problem with them. They are doing exactly what I would expect a blog so named to be doing. How exactly does that equate to I have a problem with them?
I don’t have a problem with this forum. I am just trying to present the other side of the coin that wouldn’t be seen by your readers.
First Phil, I threw the ice chest story in to lighten up the debate a little and you took advantage of it to throw it back in my face. First, I never said they were ALL corrupt. I never said we didn’t need traffic control, I never said we didn’t need speed enforcement. Having said that, I do have serious problems with the over all system….in this state. I don’t know anything about your state.
As for running for public office to change laws and policy, you know that’s a safe thing for you to say. That’s one of the firsts things a cop would say for the very same reason. I’ve explained all this in great detail in past posts. You and Randy are so uncompromising. You can’t debate with a brick wall.
Phil says (I don’t have a problem with the DUIBLOG they are doing exactly what I’d expect them to be doing there The DUI Lawyer is looking to increase his client list by telling those who have been arrested for DUI that the laws are wrong, the scientific instrument is fault ect ect.).
It sounds to me like you have a problem with them. You just stated it. If your so knowledgeable, you should be able to present you argument quite adequately. You seem to dominate this blog so well. What’s the difference? Go over there and try your hand.
Well, if I had a scanner, I could send you the copies of the reports… you know what I could keep going with the rest of this, but hey, like I said before, it is pointless… You are once again mixing up what I have said, etc… Doesn’t really surprise me.
You are right Phil, no one has ever been innocent of a crime but found guilty. An old saying comes to mind, something about arguing with fools or something or other.
However, one very last thing… if you had read more of the articles (you don’t even have to read Lawrence Taylor’s commentaries) on a certain website, you would know that the Supreme Court doesn’t care about any one’s constitutional rights in regard to DWI, and I don’t have that kind of money. Peace out and keep those eyes closed, while half reading posts.
donleedon writes(Not solely for this reason, but I now no longer live in that state. And I don’t believe that the police were just picking on me either. Also, I do not believe that all of them are corrupt or incompetent either.
I am wondering what kind of behavior that you mentioned, as I passed the FSTs and gave the officer every thing he asked for immediately. In fact, my lawyer in the second case (we won’t even discuss the one in my first case, he was a bonehead that told me I would be better pleading out after taking my money, second lawyer would have definitely fought it, so I guess I was the bigger bonehead by listening to lawyer 1) said that the only thing that would lose my case was if the judge was having a bad day and threw out my evidence as the odor of alcohol was not enough to convict.
He also stated that they had lost cases they should have won, and won cases they should have lost and that this particular judge was bad about that.
I guess its whining if you truly believe that an injustice has been done not only to you, but many. Not every one is cookie cutter like the current laws suggest, and I am not talking about tolerance levels. I guess if I was one of the guilty that got away with it I should do the opposite and celebrate. I know that I would not be silent if it were any other crime that I did not commit but was found guilty anyway…)
That is all unprovable hearsay evidence. How can you prove to me that you passed your field sobriety tests? You could have been slurring your speach, stumbling while trying to walk the line and poking yourself in the eye while trying to touch you nose for all I know. Then you tell me you passed and I am to believe that you did indeed pass and you were arrested for DUI soley because your tail light was broken? I have a better working knowledge of how it works than that sorry. If you are telling the truth then I’d like to know at what step you are at in your appeal process and how close are you to having your case heard by the Supreme court? If you truly believe that what happened to you was injust and truly wanted to make a difference in the world you’d have apealed the decision and a case of your reported magnatude would have had lawyers chomping at the bit to fight it to get an overturn then sue for a violation of your civil rights.
Not solely for this reason, but I now no longer live in that state. And I don’t believe that the police were just picking on me either. Also, I do not believe that all of them are corrupt or incompetent either.
I am wondering what kind of behavior that you mentioned, as I passed the FSTs and gave the officer every thing he asked for immediately. In fact, my lawyer in the second case (we won’t even discuss the one in my first case, he was a bonehead that told me I would be better pleading out after taking my money, second lawyer would have definitely fought it, so I guess I was the bigger bonehead by listening to lawyer 1) said that the only thing that would lose my case was if the judge was having a bad day and threw out my evidence as the odor of alcohol was not enough to convict.
He also stated that they had lost cases they should have won, and won cases they should have lost and that this particular judge was bad about that.
I guess its whining if you truly believe that an injustice has been done not only to you, but many. Not every one is cookie cutter like the current laws suggest, and I am not talking about tolerance levels. I guess if I was one of the guilty that got away with it I should do the opposite and celebrate. I know that I would not be silent if it were any other crime that I did not commit but was found guilty anyway…
The point that I have been trying to make here is that what the NMA has posted for you to read about Dr Dubowski is not all there is to read. I think that if we were able to read the transcripts of his testimony what he said was that there is a 2.8% chance that a random DUI suspect’s BAC would be overstated by a random Breathalyzer. That is different than the 23% that the NMA has said. Maybe the NMA will make those transcripts available to us.
Joe writes(Several of my co-workers and I got a laugh when one of our other co-workers got stopped twice in one night for simply having a ice chest in the back of his pickup. Of course he in fact had not had anything to drink so he never was charged with anything.)
So I guess the point to this story is that
1) not ALL cops are corrupt enough to arrest the innocent
2) Cops actually have criteria for those that get arrested for DUI. Like they are driving under the influence of alcohol or something like that.
Joe writes(I’m a basically a non-drinker although a small amount of wine daily is supposed to be good for heart deasese, which I have, I generally dont’ keep any on hand, so I don’t have a dog in this fight. Having said that I am highly suspectionous of the governments claims and some soles like you simply because of my experiences with the speeding enforcement problem.
The totally illogical way in which traffic enforcement is conducted around here cast suspection on all traffic enforcement activities.
If you have a problem with this DUI blog why don’t you try to convince them as you are over here on this site. There must be a way to communicate to them.)
If you have a problem with the way traffic laws are enforced where you live, run for office and make some changes.
I don’t have a problem with the DUIBLOG they are doing exactly what I’d expect them to be doing there The DUI Lawyer is looking to increase his client list by telling those who have been arrested for DUI that the laws are wrong, the scientific instrument is fault ect ect.
Donleedon,
Your story is very compelling. However, most people while consuming alcoholic beverages don’t realize the effects of those beverages and although your story is compelling it isn’t unique. If I ask any person convicted of DUI or DWI I get a similar story on how they were doing nothing wrong and the police were picking on them. I think that if I lived in your state given the glum outlook you have portrayed about the dishonesty of the police force I would probably refrain from ever doing anything close to having a drink then driving and if circumstances did arise where I exhibited that behavior and got caught doing it I am sure I wouldn’t whine about it afterwards.
Several of my co-workers and I got a laugh when one of our other co-workers got stopped twice in one night for simply having a ice chest in the back of his pickup. Of course he in fact had not had anything to drink so he never was charged with anything.
My last post was for Phil. Sorry ’bout that.
I’m a basically a non-drinker although a small amount of wine daily is supposed to be good for heart deasese, which I have, I generally dont’ keep any on hand, so I don’t have a dog in this fight. Having said that I am highly suspectionous of the governments claims and some soles like you simply because of my experiences with the speeding enforcement problem.
The totally illogical way in which traffic enforcement is conducted around here cast suspection on all traffic enforcement activities.
If you have a problem with this DUI blog why don’t you try to convince them as you are over here on this site. There must be a way to communicate to them.
Wait Phil, the story’s not over…
Just after the wonderful breathalyzer paid off, the officer took me to the hospital to get my blood drawn. Right before the nurse drew my blood, my copy of ‘Catcher in the Rye’ fell out of my pocket, all the alcohol in my blood disappeared! The wonderful officer then escorted me to my lavish suite that I was awarded for the night.
The next morning, way too sober for daily functioning, I was amazed that I had only gotten through half of my 30 pack in my truck when I got back to it. Although this was a great find, it was certainly not near enough for me. So I stopped at the Demon Rum liquor store and stocked my truck up as full as I could load it, cracked another one open and on down the road I went.
I arrived at this magical looking town, with candy cane rainbows all along the streets. The sign at the city limits state ‘Welcome to HappyLand, where the innocent are always innocent, and the guilty are always guilty’. I strain to focus my blood shot eyes and I see all my friends there, Phil, Randy, the officer and the judge. I smile and wave as I tip a 40 up and take a long drink.
Suddenly I arrive at the other side of town and every thing goes black and white, the wind is whipping through the trees as if a storm is on the way. I drive through an intersection on this lonely road with a stoplight the brightest of green. The next thing I know my truck is rolling end over end and lands in a ditch. I look out of where my passenger window used to be and the driver that just plowed into me still clutching their cell phone.
Of course you will probably say that this story means that I condone drunk driving (assumption), that I still drink (assumption), that I still drive (assumption), that I failed all FSTs both times and was doing anything that even resembled drunk driving or being drunk either time (assumption), that it takes more than the breathalyzer and the odor of alcohol in the state of Arkansas to convict you (assumption). Now for the suppositions, that all LEOs and judges are honest and fair, and never do anything to further their careers that could be construed as shady(DWI arrests get promotions, awards, bonuses and overtime if they have to appear in court, DWI convictions get re-elections for judges and it is odd how convictions go up in an election year, argue with my lawyer on that one). That judges never come into a court room after having a fight with their wife and decide that every one is going to be guilty that day (you can argue with my lawyer on that one as well).
Oh and Phil, that really is a great policy, especially if MADD gets their way and lowers it to zero tolerance, not being sarcastic. But as it is now, it is not against the law to drink then drive. I am not even saying that the breathalyzer malfunctioned or the operator did anything wrong (although I do think it is possible, how is that for black and white?). There are too many factors, one such is blood/breath ratio(who’s being black and white now) which if you are one of those very unfortunate ones (not saying that I am) you may not be doing anything wrong and get everything screwed up for you. Another factor that can mess up a breathalyzer is GERD which I wish I knew at the time as I am pretty sure I do have (OK, want to call me stupid, do it because I don’t go to the doctor as often as I should, oh and that pain is why I don’t drink anymore). Which if they do pass the breath alcohol laws, I will think they are BS too.
My point is that the is no justice these laws and a crime that construes a person as guilty before proven innocent. If theft laws were structured the way that DWI laws are, police would be locking up poor people left and right. And yes yes Phil, drinking is a choice, I got you, never once said it wasn’t, but this analogy does stick because people do things all the time in their lives that make them poor.
This debate doesn’t really matter anyway, you have it in your mind that I was definitely drunk driving according to the law and nothing I say will ever convince you otherwise and every one ever convicted was just as guilty as I. Law enforcement and the judicial system never fail, falter or fictionalize. That I think a conspiracy is out to get me (don’t recall ever saying that). The simple fact of the matter is that the system is irrational and flawed. Do I think I am a victim, you bet your ass I do because when I did drink, it was hardly ever more than 5 or 6 beers and each one took me anywhere from almost a half an hour to an hour or more to finish for the most part and the few times with hard liquor, I wasn’t going anywhere after them. I always waited at very least an hour if not more before I drive. The day in question, my roommate swore I only had 4 beers as he had just changed our recycle bin, but I kept one as an ashtray. Not to mention I was no where in a state that my memory was challenged.
And of course this will add fuel to your fire… yet another reason I am sure that breathalyzers are not accurate all the time with everyone in the world, I was pulled over for having a tail light out several years ago after nursing 2 beers at a bar with my friends, size 12 oz, over the course of about 4 hours. Once again, I pass all the FSTs, the hand held lights up and machine wonderful at the station states 0.075. My point in telling you this, that on this occasion, the breathalyzer read higher BAC than I even came close to consuming. Oh and funny story(sarcastic, not ha ha) but while this officer had me pulled over because of this tail light, a very large truck passed by, speeding at least twice the speed limit and all over the road… tell me that it is always about safety and nothing to do with money/advancement with some of these guys.
I don’t know about you, but when I see a pattern (which you probably will, but I don’t care at this point) of a machine giving off the wall readings that just don’t fit the circumstances… kind of makes me go hmmm. You of course will probably say that you see something else because of your unshakable faith in the system and their tools. You seem to think that every law and method that the government comes up with is just great and couldn’t possibly be wrong if only because they have been doing it for years.
And just to get this out of the way… Do I want to be able to roll down the road after drinking a sixer in an hour, hell no. But when I still drank, I do remember it was nice to have a brewsky with my steak at a nice restaurant with no fear of losing so much (which some have, btw). I agree, just as any one on this site does, get the drunk drivers off of the road, (pardon me while I rip off Megadeth) and if there’s a new way, I’ll be the first in line, but it better work this time.
donleedon writes on Jan 4, 2009
(You know what Phil, you are right, goes something like this…
I woke up early one Sunday morning, and just like every day I could not function until after I chugged my first 30 pack of beer. Feeling quite alive at that point, I grabbed my second 30 pack and tossed it into the truck along with my 1/5 of SoCo.
I was the terror of the road for 30 minutes until Captain Wonderfulneverlies did his civic duty and pulled me over after plowing over my 15th mailbox, barely missing all the neighborhood children, but not their dogs.
I fell out of my truck and directly puked on the noble officers shoes, but being the upright bastion of honesty and integrity he did not get angry. He also held my beer for me when I needed to get my license and registration.
I could not even stand to perform any of the FSTs and his PBT burst into flames when I blew into it.
The officer transported me to the station in a safe and orderly fashion, never disobeying any traffic laws whatsoever.
Once at the station and after the observation period, the good old BAC DataMaster lit up like a pinball machine and paid off in silver dollars.
Does this sound more correct Phil? I will not bother fencing with you anymore and I hope you enjoy the true story of what happened that day. ASSumption seems to be what you do best, and you do have a few facts, which makes you truly MADD dangerous.)
I don’t assume anything donleedon, I am using the information you are providing me with and my knowledge of how the process takes place. Like many of the people who take your position on issues like this there is only black and white no grey. for a person to be guilty of the elements of this particular crime doesn’t mean they acted as you described in your story. Conversely if a person didn’t act as you described it doesn’t mean he is innocent. In this case I truly believe that that the truth is somewhere between your sarcastic story here and innocent. Drinking an alcoholic beverage is a choice made consciously. The decision to drive afterwards is a choice you made. There is no conspiracy against you because you got caught. I never find myself in your position because if I have 1 drink I don’t drive and if I need to drive I don’t drink. Ironic how that works for me. I only hope that after 2 DUIs you can get the help you need so that there isn’t a 3rd or a fatal crash. Let me guess now you’ll argue that there is no corelation between drunk driving and fatal crashes.
You know what Phil, you are right, goes something like this…
I woke up early one Sunday morning, and just like every day I could not function until after I chugged my first 30 pack of beer. Feeling quite alive at that point, I grabbed my second 30 pack and tossed it into the truck along with my 1/5 of SoCo.
I was the terror of the road for 30 minutes until Captain Wonderfulneverlies did his civic duty and pulled me over after plowing over my 15th mailbox, barely missing all the neighborhood children, but not their dogs.
I fell out of my truck and directly puked on the noble officers shoes, but being the upright bastion of honesty and integrity he did not get angry. He also held my beer for me when I needed to get my license and registration.
I could not even stand to perform any of the FSTs and his PBT burst into flames when I blew into it.
The officer transported me to the station in a safe and orderly fashion, never disobeying any traffic laws whatsoever.
Once at the station and after the observation period, the good old BAC DataMaster lit up like a pinball machine and paid off in silver dollars.
Does this sound more correct Phil? I will not bother fencing with you anymore and I hope you enjoy the true story of what happened that day. ASSumption seems to be what you do best, and you do have a few facts, which makes you truly MADD dangerous.