Field sobriety tests
 

https://globalnews.ca/news/4739507/e...stop-campaign/

Saw this story on the news tonight and we got talking about checkstops and field sobriety tests.

First off, I don't care about the new mandatory testing without probable cause. It's never taken much for an officer to claim probable cause to give a field test so this news doesn't concern me one bit.

My real question for the LEOs here is this: If I know I am sober and I know I have crappy balance, can I (politely) ask to go straight to a breathalyzer instead of dancing a newfie jig while touching my nose on the side of the road?

you can explain and ask, and probably be accommodated, but it's not your call in the end...….may as well try the field sobriety test and go in if you fail.

If they say no, just exaggerate your actions. Instead of your nose, stick it in your belly button. Do the moon walk for the straight line walk and finish off with a wet Willy. You’ll likely make good money on YouTube if recorded...

Beware of the Scottish sobriety test...

https://youtu.be/2FxEI45o5nQ

ARG

This could really extend the lines at Check Stops. ? First threshold is evidence of apparent impairment, why take it past that ? :confused:

Grizz

This is the best.... lmao
https://youtu.be/9tXREbvXKeA

Field sobriety tests in Alberta are only used for drug impaired driving, not alcohol. With alcohol it stays the same in that if an officer has reasonable and probable grounds to arrest you for impaired driving by alcohol, they will and then you are taken to give breath samples. If officers have reasonable suspicion that you are driving and that you have alcohol in your body (pretty low threshold to meet), they can demand a breath sample into a screening device. Based on the results of the screening device, they may develop grounds to believe you are impaired and arrest you and take you to get evidentiary breath samples. The only thing changing with this is that after December 18, officers no longer need to develop reasonable suspicion and can demand a sample into a screening device from anyone driving.


As far as any fears of getting charged with impaired for having bad balance, this would not happen. Like with alcohol screening devices, in order to conduct field sobriety tests on somebody, Police need reasonable suspicion that a person is driving after consuming a drug. This is not changing after December 18 and Police will continue to have to meet this threshold prior to doing field sobriety tests. As a result, Police will already have a nexus of some sort to a drug prior to doing a sobriety test ( person is driving and was observed smoking a joint or maybe a person is stopped and police find a crack pipe with indicia of recent use in the driver's pocket.


If a person fails the field sobriety test, they are then evaluated by a drug recognition expert. If after this evaluation, the DRE believes the person is impaired by a drug, Police may demand blood. The blood is drawn and the person is released without charges. Once the blood tests come back, if the results confirm the presence of the drug suspected by the DRE, the person is then charged with drug impaired driving.

As you can see, there is no way you could get charged for simply having bad balance or simply doing poorly on the field sobriety tests.

Absolutely all you got to say is that you have a health/medical concern ref balance and that you could possibly get hurt so over to the breathalyzer.
Your not being difficult and safety is all involved concern.

Do they actually ask you to say the alphabet backwards?
I'm quite sure I can't do that.
Many years ago I was pulled over late at night and he asked me to say the months of the year backwards.
I said "Well, I guess I'm going to jail."
He said "Just give it a try"
And to my surprise I did it.
But I can't do the alphabet backwards.
But maybe if you can, it means you're on performance enhancing drugs?

Ya I'd be in trouble. The only way I know how to say the alphabet the proper way is by singing it in my head.
LMNOP

SFST’s are standardized and I never received any training asking people to recite the alphabet backwards. If they ask my guess is it’s part of a divided attention task something done to get you trying to do 2-3 simple tasks at once. If your intoxicated you have a real hard time divinding your attention to complete them. For example asking someone for their drivers license and how their day is going or where they are off too. Usually they can’t concentrate enough to carry on the conversation while looking for the license or vice versa.

I WAS trained before any SFST task to ask is there any medical condition that would prevent you from ..... if there is then I would ask if you wish to proceed or opt out of that test. Last thing I want is someone eating the curb while I’m out with them. Hell many times if people were failing I’d tell them to stop, take a deep breath and relax. Many people just get real nervous and can’t give clues to intoxication when they aren’t.

Nope..I would not be so sure about that..
(Start vid @26:10)

https://www.cbc.ca/fifth/episodes/20...8/driving-high

what is the field test for pot?

My buddy says they put you in the back seat of a cop car with an open bag of Dorito's it must be more complicated than that.

McDonalds fries on the other side of you.

Double the number of checkstops Canada wide, then triple it and double it again.

As of December 18 will people be legally required to perform a field sobriety test or blow into an roadside alcohol screening device or could they just opt out and ask to be tested at a police station?

If you are stopped and an ASD or SFST demand is read to you, you are required to participate in either a roadside breath screening or SFST exam. If you refuse you will be charged with refusal which carries the same penalty as impaired driving. The only thing changing is that police officers no longer need reasonable suspicion to demand a roadside breath sample of you after December 18. We still require reasonable suspicion to demand a Field Sobriety Test.

If you fail a roadside screening device you are then taken to a station for further evidentiary breath testing. Similarly, if you fail an SFST, you are taken to a station for a DRE exam. Either way, you are lawfully required to participate in the roadside test.

So basically everyone is guilty of impaired driving until they prove themselves innocent.

It has been that way for far more than 30 years she re have you been?:confused:
You can refuse to blow but you will be charged with refusing to blow a breathylizer .
Cat

But who would be left to catch the bank robbers?

Basically they are taking back the roads from idiots who think it is there right to drive impaired. Which is a good thing.

The difference now will be that there is not even the veil of your constitutionally protected right of assumed innocence because there is no longer any "suspicion" of guilt necessary.

They really didn’t need any before “ the suspect was swerving / had swerved “etc.......
Cat

Chip, Chip, chip one freedom at a time welcome to Canada.

Don't drive impaired.....no problem

People need to think first.

Driving is a privilege. Liberty doesn't allow one to tread on others rights.

The right for everyone to be safe on the roads trumps your piddly idea of "how dare you stop me".....

LEO's have had the authority to stop anyone operating on a highway at anytime to check documentation, mechanical safety and sobriety.

Nothing is changing here. What is changing is the ability to make sure everyone is compliant.

The government loses money everytime someone is charged with impaired driving. There is no reward for them other than public safety.

So is it your paranoid desire to believe you are important enough to have a vendetta against you?

Its minutes out of your life to use an ASD roadside. It will get more unpaired drivers off the road.

I don't think people understand the epidemic drunk driving is actually.

Interesting thing about check stops and me personally
I quit drinking quite a few years ago (1987)
Gone through lots of check stops since .
NOT ONCE have been asked to do a sobriety test or blow in a breathylizer since I quit drinking!:thinking-006:
Cat

I understand your point Rem but for myself it is the gradual erosion of all my rights which has become a very slippery slope that I struggle with. The loss in personal freedoms is getting worse with every turn. If it is about public safety why do they allow part of the population to ride motorcycles without helmets?
Having speed traps at the bottom of hills etc. is not about safety either.....There is a very long list of the abuses of power that results in many losses of personal freedom the people of this country suffer from and it is getting worse. The RCMP and firearms? Where will that one end?

The issue that I have, is that your vehicle can be towed and held at considerable expense, with no proof of guilt, and no opportunity to prove your innocence and be compensated if you are innocent. In effect, a financial sentence is being handed out without ever being proven guilty.