haughtney1
Quote:
"I have already stated a breath test is an inappropriate means of measuring ones sobriety (call it below the required Breath alcohol limit if you wish)"
I don't call it either of the 2 things you mention. I call it having a BAC above a prescribed limit. As for how you mesure that level of BAC, I disgaree that a breath test is an inapproriate way of mesuring that. Your opinion differs, what do you base that on?
Quote:
"Which in itself proves nothing other than showing that the process is an ASS the officer who failed spectacularly in his duties.
He/she waisted valuable and finite resources, removed a wholly innocent professional from his place of work, and inconvenienced several hundred passengers.....for nothing"
How did he/she fail in his duties? A requirement was made for a breath test, that test was positive. You may think the process is an ASS, please explain that process, and show why it is an Ass then.
Quote:
"...or attempted to discover other than deciding to administering an evidental breath test which by its physical nature is a poor indicator of ones sobriety"
Then in your last post
"Quote:
Again, you are making the mistake of confusing 'sobriaty' and having aBAC above a prescribed limit.
No I'm not.....I didn't make the link, I made the point that the evidential breath test is a POOR indicator of sobriety..nothing more...please don't make assumptions on my behalf"
A breath test is not an indication of sobriaty, it is not claimed to be. It does not have to be, as that is not what it is being used for. What it is however, is mesure of BAC, because that is the offence being ivestigated.
The breath test used was not an 'evidential' breath test as you put it, it is a screening test, which gives the officer evidence that justifys arrest, nothing more.
You can conclude what you like, and what I say will make no difference to that. I don't see how the officer faced with a positive test can make any other decision other than arrest.