Breath-Test Refusers 'Drunk' Under Thai Traffic Law Change

[Arkady]

I read in nameless media this morning that they are also increasing the maximum fine from Bt 10,000 to 20,000. Since the cops currently quote the maximum fine in their introductory spiel - "you dung you stay polit station tonigh you go court you pay Bt 10,000 fine" - in the hope of charging the maximum bribe, we can assume they adjust immediately and that Thais who can often get off for Bt 2,000 will have to pay 4,000. I think we can expect the BIB to be out in force with their greasy palms outstretched.

Edited July 12, 2012 by Arkady

[Para]

This is no different from someone refusing a drug test.

Refuse a drugs test and you get an automatic 30 days in nick.

[diggledunc]

I don't understand what flashlights and light reflectors have to do with this.

Anything to reduce the practice of drunk driving is good, but has anyone here actually seen a breathalizer used in Thailand? I haven't. And what are the penalties for drunk DUI?

I have never seen them used here in Thailand. But then again I have never seen them used in Canada or the United States either. Of course I only lived there 64 years.

But I have seen road checks in the holiday seasons where they stop every one and if they suspect them they can legally give them a breathalyzer test and if they refuse be taken in. That is providing they are showing signs of intoxication. Generally in the morning or evening paper they will have a little article so many people stopped and failed breathalyzer test. A lot of times they are just given a 24 hour suspension.

My concern is going the other way will they even bother with them.

I have seen them used in Sakon Nakhon province and indeed one night the Thai driver of the car had to give a test. He failed but the trouble is he bought his way out of it and drove on. How surprising, but other people have been fined 10,000B and had to pick up their car the next day. Doesn't happen enough but at least sometimes they do it. Loosing the car for one day and then next day being able to drive and only paying 10,000B doesn't seem to me enough. Compare to UK and I am sure Oz and USA.

[chooka]

Take it from a multiple offender from the Sate of Victoria.... after the PBT you are escorted to the station and you need to wait at least an hour before they will test you it is then that result on which you are tried. Nothing should pass your lips for that time or the clock starts over again, at least one hour.

You need to wait at least 15 minutes from the time of being intercepted. However it normally takes 20 minutes to complete the proforma record of interview and to set up the instrument.

In N.S.W you can be arrested but in Victoria you are not arrested.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItELcX0lfAA&feature=player_detailpage

[softgeorge]

Take it from a multiple offender from the Sate of Victoria.... after the PBT you are escorted to the station and you need to wait at least an hour before they will test you it is then that result on which you are tried. Nothing should pass your lips for that time or the clock starts over again, at least one hour.

wow you lucky bastard, you get free wifi in prison.

[F430murci]

" to detain suspicious motorists who refuse to take a breath test without a sound reason."

So basically someone stone cold sober can be told to take a breath test,

with no other valid reason given, and if they think that is just nuts, they can be detained.

How long? Where? What mechanism gets them un-detained?

I'm not against stopping drunk drivers at all,

but there seems to be some stuff not written in to this, that leaves it too open ended.

Why would someone that is not drunk want to refuse a breath test?

They have had random breath tests in Australia for years. It is an excellent way to reduce drunk drivers. If drunk drivers can refuse breath tests, how do you stop them?

Sent from my shoe phone

Because I may not necessarily trust the police breathalyzer unit. I would happily submit to a blood test at a nearby hospital, but how can I trust a breath test? Given the meagre budgets of police departments, how can we know the unit is properly maintained and accurate?

It comes down to trust, and there are many who legitimately don't trust the police enough to take a test on the side of the road. Even in most states in the US, people are allowed to refuse a breath test if they agree to a blood or urine test, and the police there are trusted. Of course, they do have to wait in a cell at the police station until those results come back, but since some don't trust the equipment, they opt for a blood test so there can be no doubt.

Given the history of corruption within the police department in Thailand, giving them any kind of power like this is worrying. As much as I detest drunk drivers, the police are not honest enough to get this kind of authority without adequate safeguards. There should be a provision in the law for people stopped to demand an independent blood test at a nearby hospital, and for the police to be responsible for restitution if their equipment is found to be faulty.

Don't drink and drive and calibration won't be an issue.

[gregb]

" to detain suspicious motorists who refuse to take a breath test without a sound reason."

So basically someone stone cold sober can be told to take a breath test,

with no other valid reason given, and if they think that is just nuts, they can be detained.

How long? Where? What mechanism gets them un-detained?

I'm not against stopping drunk drivers at all,

but there seems to be some stuff not written in to this, that leaves it too open ended.

Why would someone that is not drunk want to refuse a breath test?

They have had random breath tests in Australia for years. It is an excellent way to reduce drunk drivers. If drunk drivers can refuse breath tests, how do you stop them?

Sent from my shoe phone

Because I may not necessarily trust the police breathalyzer unit. I would happily submit to a blood test at a nearby hospital, but how can I trust a breath test? Given the meagre budgets of police departments, how can we know the unit is properly maintained and accurate?

It comes down to trust, and there are many who legitimately don't trust the police enough to take a test on the side of the road. Even in most states in the US, people are allowed to refuse a breath test if they agree to a blood or urine test, and the police there are trusted. Of course, they do have to wait in a cell at the police station until those results come back, but since some don't trust the equipment, they opt for a blood test so there can be no doubt.

Given the history of corruption within the police department in Thailand, giving them any kind of power like this is worrying. As much as I detest drunk drivers, the police are not honest enough to get this kind of authority without adequate safeguards. There should be a provision in the law for people stopped to demand an independent blood test at a nearby hospital, and for the police to be responsible for restitution if their equipment is found to be faulty.

Don't drink and drive and calibration won't be an issue.

Naiive statement. And nowhere did I use the word "calibration". You introduced that word to make a straw man argument, as if the only thing that could go wrong was a small error in the absolute level. There is no guarantee that someone who hasn't touched a drop might not be found guilty with an incorrectly maintained device.

A blood test is the only thing I would trust in Thailand.

[F430murci]

Because I may not necessarily trust the police breathalyzer unit. I would happily submit to a blood test at a nearby hospital, but how can I trust a breath test? Given the meagre budgets of police departments, how can we know the unit is properly maintained and accurate?

It comes down to trust, and there are many who legitimately don't trust the police enough to take a test on the side of the road. Even in most states in the US, people are allowed to refuse a breath test if they agree to a blood or urine test, and the police there are trusted. Of course, they do have to wait in a cell at the police station until those results come back, but since some don't trust the equipment, they opt for a blood test so there can be no doubt.

Given the history of corruption within the police department in Thailand, giving them any kind of power like this is worrying. As much as I detest drunk drivers, the police are not honest enough to get this kind of authority without adequate safeguards. There should be a provision in the law for people stopped to demand an independent blood test at a nearby hospital, and for the police to be responsible for restitution if their equipment is found to be faulty.

Don't drink and drive and calibration won't be an issue.

Naiive statement. And nowhere did I use the word "calibration". You introduced that word to make a straw man argument, as if the only thing that could go wrong was a small error in the absolute level. There is no guarantee that someone who hasn't touched a drop might not be found guilty with an incorrectly maintained device.

A blood test is the only thing I would trust in Thailand.

I introduced the word calibration because breathalyzer accuracy is dependent upon calibration. If calibrated correctly, they are very accurate. I can assure you that no way anyone will blow a .08 or .10 without having "touched a drop." Yeah, mas spec/gas chromograhpy is always most reliable way to find anything in someone's blood stream, but hardly necessary for alcohol content. I think even Thais could get BAC from a breathalzer correct. Just blow in straw. Sheez, the cops running these things is small rural USA communities are far from rocket scientist . . . Now Thais doing stuff like HGN at road side would make a bit concerned . . . Again, don't drink and drive and you will be good and won't have to worry about calibration.

[gregb]

Because I may not necessarily trust the police breathalyzer unit. I would happily submit to a blood test at a nearby hospital, but how can I trust a breath test? Given the meagre budgets of police departments, how can we know the unit is properly maintained and accurate?

It comes down to trust, and there are many who legitimately don't trust the police enough to take a test on the side of the road. Even in most states in the US, people are allowed to refuse a breath test if they agree to a blood or urine test, and the police there are trusted. Of course, they do have to wait in a cell at the police station until those results come back, but since some don't trust the equipment, they opt for a blood test so there can be no doubt.

Given the history of corruption within the police department in Thailand, giving them any kind of power like this is worrying. As much as I detest drunk drivers, the police are not honest enough to get this kind of authority without adequate safeguards. There should be a provision in the law for people stopped to demand an independent blood test at a nearby hospital, and for the police to be responsible for restitution if their equipment is found to be faulty.

Don't drink and drive and calibration won't be an issue.

Naiive statement. And nowhere did I use the word "calibration". You introduced that word to make a straw man argument, as if the only thing that could go wrong was a small error in the absolute level. There is no guarantee that someone who hasn't touched a drop might not be found guilty with an incorrectly maintained device.

A blood test is the only thing I would trust in Thailand.

I introduced the word calibration because breathalyzer accuracy is dependent upon calibration. If calibrated correctly, they are very accurate. I can assure you that no way anyone will blow a .08 or .10 without having "touched a drop." Yeah, mas spec/gas chromograhpy is always most reliable way to find anything in someone's blood stream, but hardly necessary for alcohol content. I think even Thais could get BAC from a breathalzer correct. Just blow in straw. Sheez, the cops running these things is small rural USA communities are far from rocket scientist . . . Now Thais doing stuff like HGN at road side would make a bit concerned . . . Again, don't drink and drive and you will be good and won't have to worry about calibration.

My previous statement stands. There are many ways to have errors, up to an including malicious intent, which could cause someone who had not touched a drop to register incorrectly. Calibration is only a small subset of this.

The law should include the ability to demand a blood test. Without that safeguard, I don't support giving this kind of authority to the Thai police.

[F430murci]

Don't drink and drive and calibration won't be an issue.

Naiive statement. And nowhere did I use the word "calibration". You introduced that word to make a straw man argument, as if the only thing that could go wrong was a small error in the absolute level. There is no guarantee that someone who hasn't touched a drop might not be found guilty with an incorrectly maintained device.

A blood test is the only thing I would trust in Thailand.

I introduced the word calibration because breathalyzer accuracy is dependent upon calibration. If calibrated correctly, they are very accurate. I can assure you that no way anyone will blow a .08 or .10 without having "touched a drop." Yeah, mas spec/gas chromograhpy is always most reliable way to find anything in someone's blood stream, but hardly necessary for alcohol content. I think even Thais could get BAC from a breathalzer correct. Just blow in straw. Sheez, the cops running these things is small rural USA communities are far from rocket scientist . . . Now Thais doing stuff like HGN at road side would make a bit concerned . . . Again, don't drink and drive and you will be good and won't have to worry about calibration.

My previous statement stands. There are many ways to have errors, up to an including malicious intent, which could cause someone who had not touched a drop to register incorrectly. Calibration is only a small subset of this.

The law should include the ability to demand a blood test. Without that safeguard, I don't support giving this kind of authority to the Thai police.

I would be more concerned about planting drugs. If they are out to get you, they can just drop a few pills in your car . . . Much easier and they can keep your car then. They could also just frame you for some other crime you did not commit if you want to be paranoid about it and think they are just out to get you. Perhaps you can request a blood test at your cost if you get framed for DUI and have not drank a drop . . . Otherwise, I guess cops just need to take your word at face value if you say you have not been drinking, but don't trust their breathalzer. I just see why they are going to go through trouble to frame someone for something minor like DUI when they can really burn you if they want. Heck, they could just say you failed it without even giving it to you in the first place so it does not matter if you agreed to it or not if they just want to get you.

[moe666]

I don't understand what flashlights and light reflectors have to do with this.

Anything to reduce the practice of drunk driving is good, but has anyone here actually seen a breathalizer used in Thailand? I haven't. And what are the penalties for drunk DUI?

I have never seen them used here in Thailand. But then again I have never seen them used in Canada or the United States either. Of course I only lived there 64 years.

But I have seen road checks in the holiday seasons where they stop every one and if they suspect them they can legally give them a breathalyzer test and if they refuse be taken in. That is providing they are showing signs of intoxication. Generally in the morning or evening paper they will have a little article so many people stopped and failed breathalyzer test. A lot of times they are just given a 24 hour suspension.

My concern is going the other way will they even bother with them.

There is a test that the police use and it is a small light and you are suppose to follow the light with your eyes, if drunk your eyes will react in a way that the officer can determine your level of intoxication. In New Mexico if you refuse a breath test or blood test you will be charged with aggravated DWI and automatic suspicion of drivers license.

[F430murci]

I don't understand what flashlights and light reflectors have to do with this.

Anything to reduce the practice of drunk driving is good, but has anyone here actually seen a breathalizer used in Thailand? I haven't. And what are the penalties for drunk DUI?

I have never seen them used here in Thailand. But then again I have never seen them used in Canada or the United States either. Of course I only lived there 64 years.

But I have seen road checks in the holiday seasons where they stop every one and if they suspect them they can legally give them a breathalyzer test and if they refuse be taken in. That is providing they are showing signs of intoxication. Generally in the morning or evening paper they will have a little article so many people stopped and failed breathalyzer test. A lot of times they are just given a 24 hour suspension.

My concern is going the other way will they even bother with them.

There is a test that the police use and it is a small light and you are suppose to follow the light with your eyes, if drunk your eyes will react in a way that the officer can determine your level of intoxication. In New Mexico if you refuse a breath test or blood test you will be charged with aggravated DWI and automatic suspicion of drivers license.

That's HGN. See my post above about. I rarely if ever drive drunk, but one night a couple of years ago I had a long tough business trip, got home, went to our favorite open bar/restaurant on the beach and drank about 4 double top shelf margaritas with shots of patron on side. I got stopped on way home and they did HGN and I apparently passed as they let me go home, but I was literally right in front if my highrise doing u turn to pull in. Don't drink and drive since.

[Nisa]

" to detain suspicious motorists who refuse to take a breath test without a sound reason."

So basically someone stone cold sober can be told to take a breath test,

with no other valid reason given, and if they think that is just nuts, they can be detained.

How long? Where? What mechanism gets them un-detained?

I'm not against stopping drunk drivers at all,

but there seems to be some stuff not written in to this, that leaves it too open ended.

Why would someone that is not drunk want to refuse a breath test?

They have had random breath tests in Australia for years. It is an excellent way to reduce drunk drivers. If drunk drivers can refuse breath tests, how do you stop them?

Same in the US. Although laws very by state generally if you refuse a blood, urine or breath test then you are arrested for drunk driving and your license is automatically suspended for a year regardless if convicted or not. In some places if you have a previous conviction for drunk or reckless driving within the last 10-years then your license is suspended for 2 years and other circumstances such as refusal to test previously can result in a 3-year suspension. I firmly believe that one should understand you must consent to such a test in order to hold a license and I am very against most all intrusions like this from police but in this case the inconvenience of the few who are not drunk is far outweighed by public safety.

[webfact]

no need to reply to a 6 month old post

//CLOSED//

/Admin