3 ms·

USA has some very weird laws for us europeans, and this is one of them. Especially if you don't know the details of what actually happened.. someone raped and

USA has some very weird laws for us europeans, and this is one of them. Especially if you don't know the details of what actually happened.. someone raped and murdered a small child? Or someone urinated in an alley at 3 in the morning, and it just happened to be close to a school. Even stuff like age of conent law in many places have "romeo and juliet" exceptions (not a crime if the age difference between the kids involved is small), and that's with generally lower ages of consent. Other unrelated laws too, driving + alcohol rules are weird, open container laws, etc... especially the unscientific "tests", walking on a line, touching your nose, alphabet backwards (especially since we use a different "spelling" of letters here), etc... just give me a breathalyzer like in every developed country and let me go.

shortrounddev2 2y ago
The crimes that a person has been convicted of are usually visible in the database. "Indecent exposure" vs "child molestation" etc
- ajsnigrutin 2y ago
  Indecent exposure, like peeing in an alley, or like walking to a group of kids and intentionally exposing yourself infront of them?
  - shortrounddev2 2y ago
    No more details that that as far as I know ow
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    It is the crime revealed in the database, not the case details. However, it's important to know that the entirety of criminal court cases is public record in most US states. You can walk into a courthouse and watch testimony or look up the file at the courthouse
yieldcrv 2y ago
When I first started reading appeals court cases, my mind was blown at things like this. A guy wasn't appealing the facts and crime, just the inclusion on the sex offender list. And the judges were like "oh wow, you're right, this isn't even a listed reason to be included on the list, the prosecutor erred in demanding that" like... what!? so everyone that took a plea deal or ran out of money or inspiration on how to challenge anything is just has this curse on them.
- chneu 2y ago
  Something like 97% of cases in the US are plead out, so prosecutors tend to slap a lot of weird stuff on there.
s1artibartfast 2y ago
With sex offenders, the crimes are typically. listed, at least at a high level. If someones record says for viable penetration of a minor under 13, I really don't need to know more to turn down their offer to babysit Breathalyzer is standard, but gives a poor indication of actual incapacitation.
qsort 2y ago
To be honest the breathalyzer is a bit hypocritical as well. The limit is usually set so low that it becomes a tool of selective enforcement. Either we are willing to say that the limit is 0 with a de minimis exception and otherwise any alcohol in your blood is DUI or you're effectively having the officer decide. It has happened to me a couple times; I was stopped and the officer just let me go because I was obviously fine, but I'd have failed a "scientific" test.
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  That makes a lot of sense to me from a practical perspective. Is a protection for the driver from malicious enforcement
- ajsnigrutin 2y ago
  Breathalyzers are standard over here, and pretty much never an issue. We have tolerances defined in the law (few digits get substracted by default from the measured number), then depending on the alcohol level, if you're above the legal limit, you get fined and/or lose a licence (depends on the alcohol level, is it a normal car, or driving a truck/bus, young driver, etc.). If you disagree with the measured result, the police can drive you to a nearby doctor/emergency room, and they do a blood test, but since it's more accurate with less assumed error tolerances subtracted, it's usually not worth it (unless you're just above the "losing your licence" limit, and hopefully your metabolism is faster at burning alcohol than the doctors charts assume. Everyone else in the car can be drinking while you're driving and blowing in the breathalyzer, and it's not an issue. I trust a device with proper calibrated sensors much more than an officer that has to fill out his quota or wants to fine me for some other stupid reason.

shortrounddev2 2y ago

The crimes that a person has been convicted of are usually visible in the database. "Indecent exposure" vs "child molestation" etc

ajsnigrutin 2y ago
Indecent exposure, like peeing in an alley, or like walking to a group of kids and intentionally exposing yourself infront of them?
- shortrounddev2 2y ago
  No more details that that as far as I know ow
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  It is the crime revealed in the database, not the case details. However, it's important to know that the entirety of criminal court cases is public record in most US states. You can walk into a courthouse and watch testimony or look up the file at the courthouse

yieldcrv 2y ago

When I first started reading appeals court cases, my mind was blown at things like this. A guy wasn't appealing the facts and crime, just the inclusion on the sex offender list. And the judges were like "oh wow, you're right, this isn't even a listed reason to be included on the list, the prosecutor erred in demanding that" like... what!? so everyone that took a plea deal or ran out of money or inspiration on how to challenge anything is just has this curse on them.

chneu 2y ago
Something like 97% of cases in the US are plead out, so prosecutors tend to slap a lot of weird stuff on there.

s1artibartfast 2y ago

With sex offenders, the crimes are typically. listed, at least at a high level. If someones record says for viable penetration of a minor under 13, I really don't need to know more to turn down their offer to babysit Breathalyzer is standard, but gives a poor indication of actual incapacitation.

qsort 2y ago

To be honest the breathalyzer is a bit hypocritical as well. The limit is usually set so low that it becomes a tool of selective enforcement. Either we are willing to say that the limit is 0 with a de minimis exception and otherwise any alcohol in your blood is DUI or you're effectively having the officer decide. It has happened to me a couple times; I was stopped and the officer just let me go because I was obviously fine, but I'd have failed a "scientific" test.

s1artibartfast 2y ago
That makes a lot of sense to me from a practical perspective. Is a protection for the driver from malicious enforcement
ajsnigrutin 2y ago
Breathalyzers are standard over here, and pretty much never an issue. We have tolerances defined in the law (few digits get substracted by default from the measured number), then depending on the alcohol level, if you're above the legal limit, you get fined and/or lose a licence (depends on the alcohol level, is it a normal car, or driving a truck/bus, young driver, etc.). If you disagree with the measured result, the police can drive you to a nearby doctor/emergency room, and they do a blood test, but since it's more accurate with less assumed error tolerances subtracted, it's usually not worth it (unless you're just above the "losing your licence" limit, and hopefully your metabolism is faster at burning alcohol than the doctors charts assume. Everyone else in the car can be drinking while you're driving and blowing in the breathalyzer, and it's not an issue. I trust a device with proper calibrated sensors much more than an officer that has to fill out his quota or wants to fine me for some other stupid reason.