New breathalyzer might be on the way- were all screwed

[wirednuts]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130425213901.htm

Alprazolam and benzoylecgonine were detected in exhaled breath for the first time, whereas for methadone, amphetamine, methamphetamine, cocaine, morphine, 6-acetylmorphine, tetrahydrocannabinol, buprenorphine, diazepam and oxazepam, the results confirmed previous observations.
"Considering the samples were taken 24 hours after the intake of drugs, we were surprised to find that there was still high detectability for most drugs," said lead author of the study Professor Olof Beck.

can they release this after they make our cars self driving?

 

[dmcowen674]

New breathalyzer might be on the way- were all screwed

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130425213901.htm





can they release this after they make our cars self driving?

Nothing in Title of article suggests "were all screwed".

Actual article Title

Breath Study Brings Roadside Drug Testing Closer

 

[OverVolt]

Nothing in Title of article suggests "were all screwed".

Actual article Title

Breath Study Brings Roadside Drug Testing Closer

I guess he assume everyone is on meth, crack, heroin, and xanax like the OP? :awe:

 

[IGBT]

dopers and druggies were self screwed long before this technology showed up. But insurance companies will most certainly insist employers deploy this for pre employment /random /post accident drug testing.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

So what are they going to do with this arrest people who take meds which make them better drivers?

 

[Pr0d1gy]

dopers and druggies

rofl

 

[zsdersw]

Roadside drug testing, huh? Great, one more thing for the police to fuck up and abuse.

 

[wirednuts]

Roadside drug testing, huh? Great, one more thing for the police to fuck up and abuse.

this is what i was getting at. now if you have any trace of alcohol even, any drink within 24 hours. im sure insurance companies can use this new technology as a means to raise your premiums..

and false positive? dont worry, every positive hit we take you downtown and draw your blood. dont worry about your time lost, thats not important. the nurse taking your blood? oh shes barely competent. its ok.

 

[Doppel]

Nothing in Title of article suggests "were all screwed".

Actual article Title

Breath Study Brings Roadside Drug Testing Closer

You constantly lie in thread titles and just today had one locked accordingly. His comment was obviously a personal one. Nobody thinks it was part of original title. Are you now going to police thread titles even though you are the only one continually admonished for incorrect ones?

P&N was more pleasant since you were vacationed and I look forward to you bringing it upon yourself again soon as you inevitably will.

 

[xBiffx]

this is what i was getting at. now if you have any trace of alcohol even, any drink within 24 hours. im sure insurance companies can use this new technology as a means to raise your premiums..

and false positive? dont worry, every positive hit we take you downtown and draw your blood. dont worry about your time lost, thats not important. the nurse taking your blood? oh shes barely competent. its ok.

You do know that every positive field sobriety test is backed up with a blood test, it seems. You think they go around and make tests positive for narcotics somehow? Much harder to fake a positive test.

So in the unlikely event that you failed the field test and nothing showed up in your blood you may be able to win a case for a wrongful arrest/detainment. Chances are its gets settled long before then even if anything happens in the first place.

The police don't need a positive test to arrest you for suspicion of drunk driving. If you are driving erratically, they can hit you with any number of charges. Perhaps none of them stick in the end but that doesn't stop them from sticking you in the clink for a night (or until a negative blood test comes back which is likely going to be the next day). Nothing you can do about that (besides piss and moan) since you were driving erratically to begin with.

Doubtful this research test goes anywhere outside the lab anyways.

 

[IGBT]

You do know that every positive field sobriety test is backed up with a blood test, it seems. You think they go around and make tests positive for narcotics somehow? Much harder to fake a positive test.

So in the unlikely event that you failed the field test and nothing showed up in your blood you may be able to win a case for a wrongful arrest/detainment. Chances are its gets settled long before then even if anything happens in the first place.

The police don't need a positive test to arrest you for suspicion of drunk driving. If you are driving erratically, they can hit you with any number of charges. Perhaps none of them stick in the end but that doesn't stop them from sticking you in the clink for a night (or until a negative blood test comes back which is likely going to be the next day). Nothing you can do about that (besides piss and moan) since you were driving erratically to begin with.

Doubtful this research test goes anywhere outside the lab anyways.

you can be arrested for DUI (driving under the influence) which cover a full spectrum of legal and illegal substances including PED (personal electronic devices).

 

[Darwin333]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130425213901.htm





can they release this after they make our cars self driving?

The sad part is that I guarantee that I can find a small group of people right here on Anad and we can design and build a real world test usable on the roadside that actually determines how impaired someone is. You know, the only thing they are supposed to be concerned about. It matters not WHY you are impaired, simply that you are but we don't make devices to measure that instead we use some one size fits all bullshit like BAC or this new one that gives no real data on how impaired the driver is.

This isn't anything new or rocket science or some brilliant idea either. I guarantee it has been brought up before but its much easier and better for them to use some arbitrary bullshit to increase revenue.

 

[Steeplerot]

Take the train home after the bar? If you are driving fucked up you deserve what you get.

 

[Darwin333]

You constantly lie in thread titles and just today had one locked accordingly. His comment was obviously a personal one. Nobody thinks it was part of original title. Are you now going to police thread titles even though you are the only one continually admonished for incorrect ones?

P&N was more pleasant since you were vacationed and I look forward to you bringing it upon yourself again soon as you inevitably will.

Again, why do you care if a driver has drugs in their system if they are not impaired to drive? Why don't you care about drivers that ARE impaired but don't have any drugs or alcohol in their system?

 

[Jaepheth]

I guess he assume everyone is on meth, crack, heroin, and xanax like the OP? :awe:

Op didn't say "we're all screwed" he said "were all screwed"

Clearly he's simply making the assertion that the breathalyzers' casings are assembled using screws.

 

[woolfe9998]

You do know that every positive field sobriety test is backed up with a blood test, it seems. You think they go around and make tests positive for narcotics somehow? Much harder to fake a positive test.

So in the unlikely event that you failed the field test and nothing showed up in your blood you may be able to win a case for a wrongful arrest/detainment. Chances are its gets settled long before then even if anything happens in the first place.

The police don't need a positive test to arrest you for suspicion of drunk driving. If you are driving erratically, they can hit you with any number of charges. Perhaps none of them stick in the end but that doesn't stop them from sticking you in the clink for a night (or until a negative blood test comes back which is likely going to be the next day). Nothing you can do about that (besides piss and moan) since you were driving erratically to begin with.

Doubtful this research test goes anywhere outside the lab anyways.

This is correct on the whole, except that the test you get at the station can, in most states, be blood, breath or urine, at your choice. The field breathalyzer is a miniature version of the breathalyzer at the station and is considered less reliable. Hence, it is sometimes inadmissible as evidence. It is used for probable cause to bring you to the station where you then take the real test. The larger breath machine at the station is much more reliable.

I assume the technology being discussed in the linked article could be used for field devices and/or the larger devices which are kept at the station. It's probably more useful as a device out in the field since they can require blood or urine testing at the station if they suspect drugs. The problem is getting probable cause for the drugs because the field breath test doesn't currently pick them up. Currently, people who are on drugs but not alcohol can often skate by asking for the breath test. The cops need other evidence for probable cause to require blood or urine.

 

[wirednuts]

Op didn't say "we're all screwed" he said "were all screwed"

Clearly he's simply making the assertion that the breathalyzers' casings are assembled using screws.

finally. thank you. a voice of reason.

 

[wirednuts]

Why don't you care about drivers that ARE impaired but don't have any drugs or alcohol in their system?

those are called old people. dont ever talk bad about old people. theyre old, its not their fault and the danger is different. it will kill you just the same but its different.

 

[Fern]

If they can produce a reliable breathalyzer for pot use it may help gain legalization by placing it on equal footing with alcohol, which is detected with the breathalyzer, and knocking down on argument against it.

Fern

 

[IGBT]

those are called old people. dont ever talk bad about old people. theyre old, its not their fault and the danger is different. it will kill you just the same but its different.

anybody using a PED (personal electronic device) is distracted thus impaired.

 

[Darwin333]

anybody using a PED (personal electronic device) is distracted thus impaired.

I know people who are far more impaired when they drive tired and can pass the breathalyzer tests with ease than when they have had a few drinks and would likely fail.

Again, we don't test to see if people are actually impaired we use bullshit arbitrary crap to assume that people are impaired.

 

[OverVolt]

Op didn't say "we're all screwed" he said "were all screwed"

Clearly he's simply making the assertion that the breathalyzers' casings are assembled using screws.

Lol oh I see that makes much more sense. "New Breathalyzer might be on the way- were all screwed together."

Must not have had the space for the last word. It implies they are all currently assembled and ready to go!

 

[wirednuts]

If they can produce a reliable breathalyzer for pot use it may help gain legalization by placing it on equal footing with alcohol, which is detected with the breathalyzer, and knocking down on argument against it.

Fern

that would be terrible though, seeing how alcohol breathalyzers are used. most people, especially habitual drinkers, have no ill effects at .08. and they are far less likely to kill someone compared to someone texting while driving- but we dont throw first time text offenders in jail, take their license and fine them thousands of dollars.

my guess would be a contact buzz will be enough to get busted, and the fines will probably be steeper then alcohol. all of it is bullshit. they need to test on capability, not some predetermined limit that blankets everyone.

 

[Fern]

-snip-
and they are far less likely to kill someone compared to someone texting while driving- but we dont throw first time text offenders in jail, take their license and fine them thousands of dollars.

I live in a tough anti-drunk driving state.

For first time offenders the fine is $100.

You lose your license, but not really. The judge immediately grants you a temp license so you can drive as needed for a year, which is when your regular license is reinstated.

It;s's the lawyer fee (if you bother to hire one) and the auto insurance that costs money.

Since these rules currently apply to all DUIs, including drugs (whether legal or not) nothing will change with respect to this issue.

Fern

 

[Spungo]

So what are they going to do with this arrest people who take meds which make them better drivers?

How dare you drive while high on ADD meds like amphetamine. You should drive while you are very easily distracted and possibly sleep deprived.