Daily CE Musings of Piob - Page 306
Edit - at least, in the few cases I've heard of. That is not standard practice.
Edited by Harold falcon - 6/27/16 at 3:21pm
I've had several chats with Harvey over time about the fact that the real issue is they keep wanting to lower and lower the BAC and eventually it will get to the point that a fully grown man will be considered "intoxicated" after a single beer. This leads to police spending their time arresting and processing soccer moms who had a couple glasses of wine at happy hour instead of focusing on catching the severely intoxicated. I believe I read once that the vast majority of alcohol related traffic accidents and fatalities are caused from individuals near double the national legal limits.
Police are a resource, just like anything. There is only a finite amount of police to deal with these issues. These low BAC's spread their resources thin and if they really want to save lives then perhaps lawmakers should take a realistic look at how their resources are being used.
That and maybe stop kicking Uber and Lyft out of cities like Austin, since it's near impossible to get a cab at night.
I've read very similar things. If a cop pulls someone over at .08, they're going to arrest them. While they are arresting someone/taking them downtown for processing/whatever they aren't out doing other things such as pulling over really drunk people.
That's not quite how I read this. They don't necessarily want to arrest said soccer moms but they want the ability to arrest said soccer mom, plus more likely, the person that just looks like he/she is guilty of something but really only has a trace of alcohol in their system. This is going to be like pulling over a car full of young black men because a tail light is out. It's not about the tail light but rather about the excuse to have an interaction where some kind of low level violation paints a mask of legitimacy on this farce.
This is an important point that people often lose sight of.
The potential for abuse obviously goes beyond simplistic "cops are nice to whites and mean to blacks" stuff, but just to take a relatively simple example --
While there are limited exceptions, as a general rule it's really, really hard to challenge selective application of criminal laws when those laws are being applied in accordance with their facial terms. For example, in the 80s and 90s many claims that drug laws were being applied unevenly to the detriment of poor, black defendants were rejected out of hand on the grounds that as long as probable cause existed to arrest/prosecute the defendant whether or not somebody else who also could have been arrested/prosecuted is totally irrelevant. Basically, the reasoning was "which criminals the government does or doesn't choose to focus on is a decision properly left to law enforcement and you're a criminal so fuck you". And to be clear -- those claims weren't rejected because there was a finding that the laws weren't being applied in discriminatory fashion. They were rejected on a theory of "shut the fuck up we don't entertain questions from criminals (or people the police have probably cause to believe are criminals) so it doesn't matter if you're right or wrong".
The logical extreme of that reasoning and of the dynamic Pio alludes to (and I'm not sure we're really all that far from this point) is that we're basically all guilty, or at least probable cause to believe we may be guilty of something exists, all the time. Given that, the cops have carte blanche to fuck with any of us any time they want, and your ability to not get fucked with a matter of grace on the part of the cops and not a right you hold as a free citizen.
The logical extreme of that reasoning and of the dynamic Pio alludes to (and I'm not sure we're really all that far from this point) is that we're basically all guilty, or at least probably cause to believe we may be guilty of something, all the time. Given that, the cops have carte blanche to fuck with any of us any time they want, and your ability to not get fucked with a matter of grace on the part of the cops and not a right you hold as a free citizen.
Could not agree with this more and much of the populace is welcoming this with open arms. Just obey every order a cop gives you, as after all if he/she says it it must be lawful, and you'll be fine.
Thanks for quoting the most unintelligibly mistyped sentence in my post. And I'm not even drunk yet, although I am excited about the four boxes of online-ordered booze I just picked up from my local.