They can accuse you without a breathalyzer test as well and they can fake blood tests just as well as a breathalyzer test. If you assume the police are just gonna plant evidence, refusing a breathalyzer test will do nothing.
CaptnNMorgan clearly stated, that they recommend taking the test at the station because of the time to get there, indicating that it’s about degradation of the blood alcohol level. They’re clearly showing that it’s not about innocent people being wrongfully accused. I know ACAB, yadda yadda, that doesn’t mean everyone accused by the police is a saint. Some people are just assholes and anyone driving drunk should get the book thrown at them. Including of course off-duty cops.
Nobody should drive drunk, but everyone has a different tolerance. Someone can blow a high number and not even feel buzzed, if their tolerance is high. I’m not talking to bad people who don’t care about other lives, I’m talking to people who would otherwise be taken advantage of by the police and their obtuse laws.
Dude, you’re literally defending drunk driving. Please educate yourself on the effect of alcohol on decision making and reaction speed. Just because someone thinks they’re not impaired doesn’t mean it’s true and how they feel doesn’t play any role in it whatsoever
You are wrong. Someone with a high tolerance won’t be drunk, but they’ll have the same amount of alcohol in their blood as someone who is wasted and has a low tolerance.
You should not drive at a fairly low blood alcohol level either. Reaction time and decision making abilities are limited even if you don’t feel anything continuously. Although, I get the feeling that you’re not capable of making good decisions while being sober either, so maybe for you it doesn’t make a difference.
Everyone driving drunk should. But, you know, you should maybe also not drive drunk
You’re assuming that police only accuse drunk drivers of driving drunk.
They can accuse you without a breathalyzer test as well and they can fake blood tests just as well as a breathalyzer test. If you assume the police are just gonna plant evidence, refusing a breathalyzer test will do nothing.
CaptnNMorgan clearly stated, that they recommend taking the test at the station because of the time to get there, indicating that it’s about degradation of the blood alcohol level. They’re clearly showing that it’s not about innocent people being wrongfully accused. I know ACAB, yadda yadda, that doesn’t mean everyone accused by the police is a saint. Some people are just assholes and anyone driving drunk should get the book thrown at them. Including of course off-duty cops.
Nobody should drive drunk, but everyone has a different tolerance. Someone can blow a high number and not even feel buzzed, if their tolerance is high. I’m not talking to bad people who don’t care about other lives, I’m talking to people who would otherwise be taken advantage of by the police and their obtuse laws.
Dude, you’re literally defending drunk driving. Please educate yourself on the effect of alcohol on decision making and reaction speed. Just because someone thinks they’re not impaired doesn’t mean it’s true and how they feel doesn’t play any role in it whatsoever
Bro, there is a difference between being drunk and not realizing it, and being sober while blowing a high number.
If you’re blowing a high number you’re literally not sober, wtf?
You are wrong. Someone with a high tolerance won’t be drunk, but they’ll have the same amount of alcohol in their blood as someone who is wasted and has a low tolerance.
You should not drive at a fairly low blood alcohol level either. Reaction time and decision making abilities are limited even if you don’t feel anything continuously. Although, I get the feeling that you’re not capable of making good decisions while being sober either, so maybe for you it doesn’t make a difference.
“I drive better after a couple drinks, it loosens me up but I’m not even buzzed.”