3 ms·

This is the normal procedure in Spain when people refuse to blow also. What many people don't know is that the blood test is not only less convenient, but typi

This is the normal procedure in Spain when people refuse to blow also. What many people don't know is that the blood test is not only less convenient, but typically also more accurate. It gives a direct alcohol-in-blood measure, so is a higher value. Therefore the situation gets worse for the driver that does not comply. This assuming that the driver behave 100% politely against the police (not always the case in the mix idiot driving + booze) Starting to insult the police is just the cherry on top for winning an extra-juicy fine. Most Police will understand that having a tracheotomy is a reasonable excuse to avoid the blow test, and will pass directly to the blood test (or will decide to take other measures first according to the case). This people simply can't blow in a normal way, so can't perform the test accurately.

stavros 3y ago
> Therefore the situation gets worse for the driver that does not comply. You're assuming the breathalyzer always underreports. I don't drink, so if I ever get a high reading somehow, you bet I'm going in for a blood draw.
- seabass-labrax 3y ago
  I was thinking the very same thing! One's liver can process alcohol at a constant rate, thus if you consume a large amount of alcohol over a relatively long period of time, you may have less in your blood than a much smaller amount consumed immediately before driving. My knowledge ends there, but I would guess that the breathalyser would pick up stronger traces of that slow consumption of alcohol relative to the content in one's blood. Drinking alcohol gradually (or, in your case, not at all) before driving is clearly more responsible than consuming it quickly and immediately beforehand, and as a result it appears to me that the blood test would always be fairer: it more closely measures what makes one's driving erratic. Does anyone know of a jurisdiction where you can explicitly request a blood test?
  - pvaldes 3y ago
    The main problems could be to be diabetic (test will confuse acetone with alcohol, false positive), to have alive yeast in the intestine (true positive even without drinking, would still be drinking under the influence), or to work in a lab (false positive, normally). You could have a false negative also, but that would be a problem by different reasons. You can request a blood test explicitly any time that you are required to pass the breath analyzer, the problem is that the movement could backfire and not play in your best interest. It will happen if you fail the breath analyzer test by a lot I talking about Europe, the laws in your country can be different, but is obvious that a driver with a tracheotomy should not lose their license just because they have a hole in the neck and are unable to use a breath-analyzer. They can always comply on doing a blood test. Common sense should be applied by the law enforcers.
    - pvaldes 3y ago
      would still be drinking under the influence -> driVing under the influence, LOL

stavros 3y ago

> Therefore the situation gets worse for the driver that does not comply. You're assuming the breathalyzer always underreports. I don't drink, so if I ever get a high reading somehow, you bet I'm going in for a blood draw.

seabass-labrax 3y ago
I was thinking the very same thing! One's liver can process alcohol at a constant rate, thus if you consume a large amount of alcohol over a relatively long period of time, you may have less in your blood than a much smaller amount consumed immediately before driving. My knowledge ends there, but I would guess that the breathalyser would pick up stronger traces of that slow consumption of alcohol relative to the content in one's blood. Drinking alcohol gradually (or, in your case, not at all) before driving is clearly more responsible than consuming it quickly and immediately beforehand, and as a result it appears to me that the blood test would always be fairer: it more closely measures what makes one's driving erratic. Does anyone know of a jurisdiction where you can explicitly request a blood test?
- pvaldes 3y ago
  The main problems could be to be diabetic (test will confuse acetone with alcohol, false positive), to have alive yeast in the intestine (true positive even without drinking, would still be drinking under the influence), or to work in a lab (false positive, normally). You could have a false negative also, but that would be a problem by different reasons. You can request a blood test explicitly any time that you are required to pass the breath analyzer, the problem is that the movement could backfire and not play in your best interest. It will happen if you fail the breath analyzer test by a lot I talking about Europe, the laws in your country can be different, but is obvious that a driver with a tracheotomy should not lose their license just because they have a hole in the neck and are unable to use a breath-analyzer. They can always comply on doing a blood test. Common sense should be applied by the law enforcers.
  - pvaldes 3y ago
    would still be drinking under the influence -> driVing under the influence, LOL