***I MOVED this quote...as it does not fall under street racing***** The instrument that is used at roadside is called an "Approved Screening Device" (ASD)most often is a Drager Alcotest 7410GLC. This instrument is approved by the Canadian Solictor General, and CFS (Centre of Forensic Science). The Breathalyzer or Intoxilyzer are instruments used back at detachments/stations to get a actual number for how much alcohol is in a person blood. At roadside if you blow into the ASD and you register between 0-49mgs of alcohol in 100ml of blood the actual number will be displayed. From 50mgs to 99mgs an "A" or warning, 100mgs or above is a "F" or Fail. If you register the 0-49mgs you will be sent on your way. If you register the "A" that is a 12hr suspension (3 day is not yet in effect) If you register the "F" the driver is arrested. When in fact the currrent 12hr is very weak, the reason I say that is NOTHING goes on the driving record. An someone that even gets a 1km over speeding ticket goes on their record.......to compare, someone drinking and driving would get no record.....just doesn't make sense. With the 3 day suspension for the first time will go on the driving record, 2nd time I think is 7 day suspension. In general each drink = 15mgs of alcohol in 100ml of blood. 4 drinks your body = 60mgs. Your body eliminates 15mgs per hr as well. So 4 drinks in 1hr = (15x4 = 60mgs minus 15mgs for 1hr = 45mgs)
***I MOVED this quote...as it does not fall under street racing*****
Reflections wrote:
If the breatealyzer reads a warning you now get a 3 day suspension instead of 12 hour. I can understand the 12 hour but 3 days when no law was broken....seems heavyhanded. I'm all for safety but this is overboard.
I could understand 3 days if there is a breatealyzer [sp.] available for the public to try. Say have a beer and take a reading, have a second take a reading and so on. We the public have no access to know what 50mg/100ml feels like, I do know what copious amounts feels like . I like to enjoy myself and have a pint or two now and then, but I don't see the need to disrupt someones life for three days when technically they have done nothing wrong.
The instrument that is used at roadside is called an "Approved Screening Device" (ASD)most often is a Drager Alcotest 7410GLC. This instrument is approved by the Canadian Solictor General, and CFS (Centre of Forensic Science).
The Breathalyzer or Intoxilyzer are instruments used back at detachments/stations to get a actual number for how much alcohol is in a person blood.
At roadside if you blow into the ASD and you register between 0-49mgs of alcohol in 100ml of blood the actual number will be displayed. From 50mgs to 99mgs an "A" or warning, 100mgs or above is a "F" or Fail.
If you register the 0-49mgs you will be sent on your way.
If you register the "A" that is a 12hr suspension (3 day is not yet in effect)
If you register the "F" the driver is arrested.
When in fact the currrent 12hr is very weak, the reason I say that is NOTHING goes on the driving record. An someone that even gets a 1km over speeding ticket goes on their record.......to compare, someone drinking and driving would get no record.....just doesn't make sense.
With the 3 day suspension for the first time will go on the driving record, 2nd time I think is 7 day suspension.
In general each drink = 15mgs of alcohol in 100ml of blood. 4 drinks your body = 60mgs. Your body eliminates 15mgs per hr as well. So 4 drinks in 1hr = (15x4 = 60mgs minus 15mgs for 1hr = 45mgs)
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
that would be 30mgs......then of course you have some elapsed time I'm sure in that consumption....ie 10-20min at least from end of first drink to end of 2nd, which also starts the elimination process as well
that would be 30mgs......then of course you have some elapsed time I'm sure in that consumption....ie 10-20min at least from end of first drink to end of 2nd, which also starts the elimination process as well
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
I am still a bit confused....so you are saying that if in 1 hr some one drinks 3 standard beers, he would still be ok to drive with the 45mg/100ml of blood alcohol level? Because I heard something about G license drivers can have up to max 1 standard drink in their system, and anything over that is against the law. Can you possibly explain a little bit more about how this works? Thanks
hwybear wrote:
that would be 30mgs......then of course you have some elapsed time I'm sure in that consumption....ie 10-20min at least from end of first drink to end of 2nd, which also starts the elimination process as well
I am still a bit confused....so you are saying that if in 1 hr some one drinks 3 standard beers, he would still be ok to drive with the 45mg/100ml of blood alcohol level?
Because I heard something about G license drivers can have up to max 1 standard drink in their system, and anything over that is against the law.
Can you possibly explain a little bit more about how this works?
Is there any way to test ourselves for future reference? ex. I would like to pound down 4 beers in one hour then blow. Is any police service willing to assist me? We know when we're speeding... we can see the speedometer. But I (and most folks, I suspect) have no idea when they're JUST over the limit with alcohol.
Is there any way to test ourselves for future reference?
ex. I would like to pound down 4 beers in one hour then blow. Is any police service willing to assist me?
We know when we're speeding... we can see the speedometer. But I (and most folks, I suspect) have no idea when they're JUST over the limit with alcohol.
Here is a good reference guide, called a "Drink Wheel", you enter the required information and it will give you a result. http://www.intox.com/wheel/drinkwheel.asp **admin** there is a link on the above site to show you how to add the "drink wheel" to a website, if you think it is appropriate for this site, for your consideration.
Here is a good reference guide, called a "Drink Wheel", you enter the required information and it will give you a result.
**admin** there is a link on the above site to show you how to add the "drink wheel" to a website, if you think it is appropriate for this site, for your consideration.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Class G1 and G2 can not have any alcohol reading at all...zero! Class G, is allowed up to 49mgs of alcohol in 100ml of blood and can still drive. An average (regardless of shape/size/sex) eliminates 15mgs of alcohol out of the body in 1 complete hour(60min).....or 7.5mgs out in 30min. The average standard drink will "input" 15mgs of alcohol INTO the body. Avg drink is 12oz beer, 1 glass of wine 5oz, 1oz shot. **************************************************** Other factors: Food: Food only slows down how fast the alcohol is absorbed into the body through the small intestine. It is still the same amount of alcohol, but it takes longer for your body to feel it. Weight: Is based on water content in the body. (ie drop of chocolate syrup into a glass of milk and another drop of syrup into a shot glass of milk........the syrup will dilute more in the glass of milk.........chocolate taste will be almost non-existent in the glass of milk). So if you are a heavier person, you have more area(water) for the alcohol to disperse in. Cheap Drunk as compared to an Expensive One: A person who drinks daily and/or seasoned drinker body reacts in a different manner to the alcohol that is in the body. The body starts becoming immune to the alcohol and to such a point that the body starts relying on alcohol (addicts or AA). Much similiar to nicotene addiction or for some of us a morning....caffeine addiction. Only difference is alcohol adversely affects the body in its day to day functions *********************************** Coles notes: It takes 1 hour to remove 1 drink from a body.
admin wrote:
I am still a bit confused....so you are saying that if in 1 hr some one drinks 3 standard beers, he would still be ok to drive with the 45mg/100ml of blood alcohol level?
Because I heard something about G license drivers can have up to max 1 standard drink in their system, and anything over that is against the law.
Can you possibly explain a little bit more about how this works?
Class G1 and G2 can not have any alcohol reading at all...zero!
Class G, is allowed up to 49mgs of alcohol in 100ml of blood and can still drive.
An average (regardless of shape/size/sex) eliminates 15mgs of alcohol out of the body in 1 complete hour(60min).....or 7.5mgs out in 30min.
The average standard drink will "input" 15mgs of alcohol INTO the body.
Avg drink is 12oz beer, 1 glass of wine 5oz, 1oz shot.
Food: Food only slows down how fast the alcohol is absorbed into the body through the small intestine. It is still the same amount of alcohol, but it takes longer for your body to feel it.
Weight: Is based on water content in the body. (ie drop of chocolate syrup into a glass of milk and another drop of syrup into a shot glass of milk........the syrup will dilute more in the glass of milk.........chocolate taste will be almost non-existent in the glass of milk). So if you are a heavier person, you have more area(water) for the alcohol to disperse in.
Cheap Drunk as compared to an Expensive One: A person who drinks daily and/or seasoned drinker body reacts in a different manner to the alcohol that is in the body. The body starts becoming immune to the alcohol and to such a point that the body starts relying on alcohol (addicts or AA). Much similiar to nicotene addiction or for some of us a morning....caffeine addiction. Only difference is alcohol adversely affects the body in its day to day functions
***********************************
Coles notes: It takes 1 hour to remove 1 drink from a body.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
So, that still does not answer the question of why do we need a 3-day suspension when we have not broken the law???? An "A" is 50-99 and the legal limit is 80?? Or is there more to this then is currently being told :| ???
So, that still does not answer the question of why do we need a 3-day suspension when we have not broken the law???? An "A" is 50-99 and the legal limit is 80?? Or is there more to this then is currently being told ???
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
**admin** there is a link on the above site to show you how to add the "drink wheel" to a website, if you think it is appropriate for this site, for your consideration.
Thats a really neat tool!
I will try to some how integrate that into the site in the near future.
Thanks for sharing some light on this. Most people aren't aware of this fact...at least I wasn't :wink: I always thought that having anymore than 1 drink in my system, could fail me. But according to the tool as well, I wouldn't be over the limit unless I drank more than 3 beers in an hour.
hwybear wrote:
An average (regardless of shape/size/sex) eliminates 15mgs of alcohol out of the body in 1 complete hour(60min).....or 7.5mgs out in 30min.
The average standard drink will "input" 15mgs of alcohol INTO the body.
Avg drink is 12oz beer, 1 glass of wine 5oz, 1oz shot.
Thanks for sharing some light on this.
Most people aren't aware of this fact...at least I wasn't
I always thought that having anymore than 1 drink in my system, could fail me. But according to the tool as well, I wouldn't be over the limit unless I drank more than 3 beers in an hour.
Over 80mgs is absolutely breaking the law...Criminal Code 253(b) There are other factors that are involved that politicians have to consider when they made the 50-99mgs warning. It depends on alcohol consumption once again....and the variety around it. ie #1: someone drinks several drinks, but it is now 4hrs later, and goes to blow, that person's readings are on the decline due to elimination of alcohol from the body.....so they could actually blow 99mgs.....and get an "A", but why? If you transport the person to the office (usually 1/2hr, then wait for a lawyer possibly 1/2hr) the person now has elminated 15mgs and down to 84mgs....add in time of 20min minimum between tests the reading will now be under 80mgs and thus NO offence under CC 253(b) ie #2 someone drinks several drinks quickly, and goes to blow, that persons readings are on the INCLINE as the body has not yet absorbed all of the alcohol into the body.......so they blow 50mgs....and get and "A", but why? The body can only absorb/process alcohol so fast (I forget the rate). So the person could potentially have drank 8 drinks in an hour.....but only shows 50mgs (5 drinks-1hr 1/2half) but still has 3 drinks not yet absorbed, when the body catches up in processing the drinks they will be blowing over 80mgs....and there is an offence under CC 253(b) No one can tell at roadside which way a persons readings are going (eliminating or inclining)....so this 50-99mgs is a fair way to treat all drivers. It gets the drivers pushing the legal alcohol limit off the road, keeps police from unnecessarily being tied up with an driver that could eventually blow under the limit.
Reflections wrote:
So, that still does not answer the question of why do we need a 3-day suspension when we have not broken the law???? An "A" is 50-99 and the legal limit is 80?? Or is there more to this then is currently being told ???
Over 80mgs is absolutely breaking the law...Criminal Code 253(b)
There are other factors that are involved that politicians have to consider when they made the 50-99mgs warning. It depends on alcohol consumption once again....and the variety around it.
ie #1: someone drinks several drinks, but it is now 4hrs later, and goes to blow, that person's readings are on the decline due to elimination of alcohol from the body.....so they could actually blow 99mgs.....and get an "A", but why? If you transport the person to the office (usually 1/2hr, then wait for a lawyer possibly 1/2hr) the person now has elminated 15mgs and down to 84mgs....add in time of 20min minimum between tests the reading will now be under 80mgs and thus NO offence under CC 253(b)
ie #2 someone drinks several drinks quickly, and goes to blow, that persons readings are on the INCLINE as the body has not yet absorbed all of the alcohol into the body.......so they blow 50mgs....and get and "A", but why? The body can only absorb/process alcohol so fast (I forget the rate). So the person could potentially have drank 8 drinks in an hour.....but only shows 50mgs (5 drinks-1hr 1/2half) but still has 3 drinks not yet absorbed, when the body catches up in processing the drinks they will be blowing over 80mgs....and there is an offence under CC 253(b)
No one can tell at roadside which way a persons readings are going (eliminating or inclining)....so this 50-99mgs is a fair way to treat all drivers. It gets the drivers pushing the legal alcohol limit off the road, keeps police from unnecessarily being tied up with an driver that could eventually blow under the limit.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
I agree to the safe side of things but with all the recent changes, I feel we are being safetied to death. Bookm's quip about having fun while driving might be true after all. And didn't you ask the question, "why are we not responsible for our own actions anymore?". Probably because responsibility has been/in the process of is being removed by the law makers. :shock:
I agree to the safe side of things but with all the recent changes, I feel we are being safetied to death. Bookm's quip about having fun while driving might be true after all. And didn't you ask the question, "why are we not responsible for our own actions anymore?". Probably because responsibility has been/in the process of is being removed by the law makers.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
If the law were properly implemented as it is written the police cannot administer a Breathalyzer or Intoxilyzer after the roadside screening device is used. The criminal code is federal law. The highway traffic act is provincial law. The federal law trumps provincial law. The HTA allow the officer to demand a Breathalyzer after a roadside screening is administered. However, criminal code s. 258(2) articulates the results from the roadside screening test cannot be used for unauthorized purposes. It lists the valid authorized purposes in 258(a). Section 253(a) or (b) is not listed. Therefore, the police are not authorized by any law to use the results from 254(2)(b) to force someone to submit to a Breathalyzer test under 254(3) in their attempt to charge them under s. 253. Code s. 254(2)(b) deals with roadside screening. It states; (b) to provide forthwith a sample of breath that, in the peace officers opinion, will enable a proper analysis to be made by means of an approved screening device and, if necessary, to accompany the peace officer for that purpose. Unauthorized use or disclosure of results 258(2) Subject to subsections (3) and (4), no person shall use, disclose or allow the disclosure of the results of physical coordination tests under paragraph 254(2)(a), the results of an evaluation under subsection 254(3.1), the results of the analysis of a bodily substance taken under paragraph 254(2)(b), subsection 254(3), (3.3) or (3.4) or section 256 or with the consent of the person from whom it was taken after a request by a peace officer, or the results of the analysis of medical samples that are provided by consent and subsequently seized under a warrant, except (a) in the course of an investigation of, or in a proceeding for, an offence under any of sections 220, 221, 236 and 249 to 255, an offence under Part I of the Aeronautics Act, or an offence under the Railway Safety Act in respect of a contravention of a rule or regulation made under that Act respecting the use of alcohol or a drug; or (b) for the purpose of the administration or enforcement of the law of a province.
hwybear wrote:
The instrument that is used at roadside is called an "Approved Screening Device" (ASD)most often is a Drager Alcotest 7410GLC. This instrument is approved by the Canadian Solictor General, and CFS (Centre of Forensic Science).
The Breathalyzer or Intoxilyzer are instruments used back at detachments/stations to get a actual number for how much alcohol is in a person blood.
If the law were properly implemented as it is written the police cannot administer a Breathalyzer or Intoxilyzer after the roadside screening device is used.
The criminal code is federal law. The highway traffic act is provincial law. The federal law trumps provincial law.
The HTA allow the officer to demand a Breathalyzer after a roadside screening is administered.
However, criminal code s. 258(2) articulates the results from the roadside screening test cannot be used for unauthorized purposes. It lists the valid authorized purposes in 258(a). Section 253(a) or (b) is not listed.
Therefore, the police are not authorized by any law to use the results from 254(2)(b) to force someone to submit to a Breathalyzer test under 254(3) in their attempt to charge them under s. 253.
Code s. 254(2)(b) deals with roadside screening. It states;
(b) to provide forthwith a sample of breath that, in the peace officers opinion, will enable a proper analysis to be made by means of an approved screening device and, if necessary, to accompany the peace officer for that purpose.
Unauthorized use or disclosure of results
258(2) Subject to subsections (3) and (4), no person shall use, disclose or allow the disclosure of the results of physical coordination tests under paragraph 254(2)(a), the results of an evaluation under subsection 254(3.1), the results of the analysis of a bodily substance taken under paragraph 254(2)(b), subsection 254(3), (3.3) or (3.4) or section 256 or with the consent of the person from whom it was taken after a request by a peace officer, or the results of the analysis of medical samples that are provided by consent and subsequently seized under a warrant, except
(a) in the course of an investigation of, or in a proceeding for, an offence under any of sections 220, 221, 236 and 249 to 255, an offence under Part I of the Aeronautics Act, or an offence under the Railway Safety Act in respect of a contravention of a rule or regulation made under that Act respecting the use of alcohol or a drug; or
(b) for the purpose of the administration or enforcement of the law of a province.
Do these machines have the ability to detect the presence of blood in the breath sample? Perhaps I have such poor dental hygiene that my gum's bleed. I blow into a machine designed to test for alcohol levels in "breath". Is the breath sample not contaminated and inaccurate? Alcohol concentrations in blood are much higher than in breath. So will this higher concentration of alcohol not result in a higher breath reading if blood were to be blown into the machine?
Do these machines have the ability to detect the presence of blood in the breath sample? Perhaps I have such poor dental hygiene that my gum's bleed. I blow into a machine designed to test for alcohol levels in "breath". Is the breath sample not contaminated and inaccurate?
Alcohol concentrations in blood are much higher than in breath. So will this higher concentration of alcohol not result in a higher breath reading if blood were to be blown into the machine?
If the law were properly implemented as it is written the police cannot administer a Breathalyzer or Intoxilyzer after the roadside screening device is used. The criminal code is federal law. The highway traffic act is provincial law. The federal law trumps provincial law. The HTA allow the officer to demand a Breathalyzer after a roadside screening is administered. However, criminal code s. 258(2) articulates the results from the roadside screening test cannot be used for unauthorized purposes. It lists the valid authorized purposes in 258(a). Section 253(a) or (b) is not listed. Therefore, the police are not authorized by any law to use the results from 254(2)(b) to force someone to submit to a Breathalyzer test under 254(3) in their attempt to charge them under s. 253. Code s. 254(2)(b) deals with roadside screening. It states; (b) to provide forthwith a sample of breath that, in the peace officers opinion, will enable a proper analysis to be made by means of an approved screening device and, if necessary, to accompany the peace officer for that purpose. Unauthorized use or disclosure of results 258(2) Subject to subsections (3) and (4), no person shall use, disclose or allow the disclosure of the results of physical coordination tests under paragraph 254(2)(a), the results of an evaluation under subsection 254(3.1), the results of the analysis of a bodily substance taken under paragraph 254(2)(b), subsection 254(3), (3.3) or (3.4) or section 256 or with the consent of the person from whom it was taken after a request by a peace officer, or the results of the analysis of medical samples that are provided by consent and subsequently seized under a warrant, except (a) in the course of an investigation of, or in a proceeding for, an offence under any of sections 220, 221, 236 and 249 to 255, an offence under Part I of the Aeronautics Act, or an offence under the Railway Safety Act in respect of a contravention of a rule or regulation made under that Act respecting the use of alcohol or a drug; or (b) for the purpose of the administration or enforcement of the law of a province. Is the valid section not listed in the "big numbers" above?
lawmen wrote:
hwybear wrote:
The instrument that is used at roadside is called an "Approved Screening Device" (ASD)most often is a Drager Alcotest 7410GLC. This instrument is approved by the Canadian Solictor General, and CFS (Centre of Forensic Science).
The Breathalyzer or Intoxilyzer are instruments used back at detachments/stations to get a actual number for how much alcohol is in a person blood.
If the law were properly implemented as it is written the police cannot administer a Breathalyzer or Intoxilyzer after the roadside screening device is used.
The criminal code is federal law. The highway traffic act is provincial law. The federal law trumps provincial law.
The HTA allow the officer to demand a Breathalyzer after a roadside screening is administered.
However, criminal code s. 258(2) articulates the results from the roadside screening test cannot be used for unauthorized purposes. It lists the valid authorized purposes in 258(a). Section 253(a) or (b) is not listed.
Therefore, the police are not authorized by any law to use the results from 254(2)(b) to force someone to submit to a Breathalyzer test under 254(3) in their attempt to charge them under s. 253.
Code s. 254(2)(b) deals with roadside screening. It states;
(b) to provide forthwith a sample of breath that, in the peace officers opinion, will enable a proper analysis to be made by means of an approved screening device and, if necessary, to accompany the peace officer for that purpose.
Unauthorized use or disclosure of results
258(2) Subject to subsections (3) and (4), no person shall use, disclose or allow the disclosure of the results of physical coordination tests under paragraph 254(2)(a), the results of an evaluation under subsection 254(3.1), the results of the analysis of a bodily substance taken under paragraph 254(2)(b), subsection 254(3), (3.3) or (3.4) or section 256 or with the consent of the person from whom it was taken after a request by a peace officer, or the results of the analysis of medical samples that are provided by consent and subsequently seized under a warrant, except
(a) in the course of an investigation of, or in a proceeding for, an offence under any of sections 220, 221, 236 and 249 to 255, an offence under Part I of the Aeronautics Act, or an offence under the Railway Safety Act in respect of a contravention of a rule or regulation made under that Act respecting the use of alcohol or a drug; or
(b) for the purpose of the administration or enforcement of the law of a province.
Is the valid section not listed in the "big numbers" above?
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Breath instruments obtain their readings from air not liquid.
Bookm wrote:
Do these machines have the ability to detect the presence of blood in the breath sample? Perhaps I have such poor dental hygiene that my gum's bleed. I blow into a machine designed to test for alcohol levels in "breath". Is the breath sample not contaminated and inaccurate?
Alcohol concentrations in blood are much higher than in breath. So will this higher concentration of alcohol not result in a higher breath reading if blood were to be blown into the machine?
Breath instruments obtain their readings from air not liquid.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
From Wiki: Mouth alcohol One of the most common causes of falsely high breathalyzer readings is the existence of mouth alcohol. In analyzing a subject's breath sample, the breathalyzer's internal computer is making the assumption that the alcohol in the breath sample came from alveolar air—that is, air exhaled from deep within the lungs. However, alcohol may have come from the mouth, throat or stomach for a number of reasons. The problem with mouth alcohol being analyzed by the breathalyzer is that it was not absorbed through the stomach and intestines and passed through the blood to the lungs. In other words, the machine's computer is mistakenly applying the "partition ratio" and multiplying the result. Consequently, a very tiny amount of alcohol from the mouth, throat or stomach can have a significant impact on the breath alcohol reading. I would conclude that blood could be blown into the machine just as easily as a belch.
From Wiki:
Mouth alcohol
One of the most common causes of falsely high breathalyzer readings is the existence of mouth alcohol. In analyzing a subject's breath sample, the breathalyzer's internal computer is making the assumption that the alcohol in the breath sample came from alveolar air—that is, air exhaled from deep within the lungs. However, alcohol may have come from the mouth, throat or stomach for a number of reasons.
The problem with mouth alcohol being analyzed by the breathalyzer is that it was not absorbed through the stomach and intestines and passed through the blood to the lungs. In other words, the machine's computer is mistakenly applying the "partition ratio" and multiplying the result. Consequently, a very tiny amount of alcohol from the mouth, throat or stomach can have a significant impact on the breath alcohol reading.
I would conclude that blood could be blown into the machine just as easily as a belch.
You are not understanding "mouth alcohol affect". Mouth alcohol is residual alcohol in the mouth. This is caused by the last "swig" of beer and then blowing directly into the instrument, where the alcohol is fresh in the mouth, therefore a false/high reading is obtained. Same can be done with mouth wash, contains alcohol, swish that around, spit it out and the alcohol in the mouthwash will make a person FAIL the test. This is why we have to determine the last consumption of alcohol, driving time from a bar, open beer in vehicle. We either wait 15minutes if open alcohol is found in the vehicle, or determine by travelling time from where the person was. Waiting 15 minutes eliminates the mouth alcohol affect and therefore a true alcohol reading from lung air will be obtained!
You are not understanding "mouth alcohol affect".
Mouth alcohol is residual alcohol in the mouth. This is caused by the last "swig" of beer and then blowing directly into the instrument, where the alcohol is fresh in the mouth, therefore a false/high reading is obtained.
Same can be done with mouth wash, contains alcohol, swish that around, spit it out and the alcohol in the mouthwash will make a person FAIL the test.
This is why we have to determine the last consumption of alcohol, driving time from a bar, open beer in vehicle. We either wait 15minutes if open alcohol is found in the vehicle, or determine by travelling time from where the person was. Waiting 15 minutes eliminates the mouth alcohol affect and therefore a true alcohol reading from lung air will be obtained!
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Your right! I'm not... In your reply you used beer and mouthwash as examples. Both these are not pure alcohol. They are mixed with water. If "fresh" in the mouth, the alcohol component contaminates the breathalyzer and results in a higher reading than a "deep lung" exhalation. If a suspect is bleeding in his mouth, his blood is constantly providing a "fresh" supply of alcohol to his mouth, the same as the mouthwash would. I don't see how this wouldn't affect the machine. The only reason I bring this up is because I once watched a defense lawyer ask an officer on the stand if he checked for blood before conducting any tests. The officer said, "No". During the judges ruling, he said he was intrigued by the lawyers questioning, but since he didn't follow it up with any arguments during closing, he chose not to include this portion of the questioning in his deliberations. (= guilty)
Your right! I'm not...
In your reply you used beer and mouthwash as examples. Both these are not pure alcohol. They are mixed with water. If "fresh" in the mouth, the alcohol component contaminates the breathalyzer and results in a higher reading than a "deep lung" exhalation. If a suspect is bleeding in his mouth, his blood is constantly providing a "fresh" supply of alcohol to his mouth, the same as the mouthwash would. I don't see how this wouldn't affect the machine.
The only reason I bring this up is because I once watched a defense lawyer ask an officer on the stand if he checked for blood before conducting any tests. The officer said, "No". During the judges ruling, he said he was intrigued by the lawyers questioning, but since he didn't follow it up with any arguments during closing, he chose not to include this portion of the questioning in his deliberations. (= guilty)
Go out on a limb here.....that the alcohol in the blood is at the same concentration as the air from the lungs, as it is already processed from the stomach into the bloodstream. As comparing alcohol coming directly into the body (ie alcoholic beverage) which has yet to be processed by the body.
Bookm wrote:
If a suspect is bleeding in his mouth, his blood is constantly providing a "fresh" supply of alcohol to his mouth, the same as the mouthwash would. I don't see how this wouldn't affect the machine.
Go out on a limb here.....that the alcohol in the blood is at the same concentration as the air from the lungs, as it is already processed from the stomach into the bloodstream. As comparing alcohol coming directly into the body (ie alcoholic beverage) which has yet to be processed by the body.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
What would I do without Google?! There's also a variety of products found in the environment that can lead to erroneous BAC results with breathalyzers. Some these products include substances or compounds found in cleaning fluids, celluloid, gasoline, paint removers, and in lacquers. Other common substances that can result in false BAC levels are alcohol, vomit, or blood in the person's mouth. False BAC readings can also be caused from electrical interference, dirt, smoke, cell phones, police radios, moisture, and tobacco smoke. [url]http://www.alcohol-test-info.comAlcohol_Blood_Tests_vs_Breathalyzers.html[/url]
What would I do without Google?!
There's also a variety of products found in the environment that can lead to erroneous BAC results with breathalyzers. Some these products include substances or compounds found in cleaning fluids, celluloid, gasoline, paint removers, and in lacquers. Other common substances that can result in false BAC levels are alcohol, vomit, or blood in the person's mouth. False BAC readings can also be caused from electrical interference, dirt, smoke, cell phones, police radios, moisture, and tobacco smoke.
I was stopped for allegedly doing 122 in a 90. I requested disclosure and like most received the minimum. The notes are just a photo copy with no explanations or typing. Only received parts of the manual that pertain to testing. Appears the officer was using a "Laser Atlanta Speed Laser", but no model or serial number is referenced in the notes. Testing is noted in two times written at the…
Hey guys, wanted to know if anyone has had a similar situation, and if you have any advice:
I was travelling E/B on Dundas St and had a green light to turn S/B on Spadina Ave. There's a no right on red sign, I observed it. I initiated my maneuver, slowly pulling my car into position to make the turn. This intersection is super busy, and there was a group of pedestrians who were painfully slowly…
This is the first traffic ticket that i have ever had, and i was wondering if someone could shoot me some of their advice as to how i could go about the case?
It was a red light, i approached the intersection and stopped, noticed two pedestrians on the right of me, and one officer on left and right of my vehicle, on the cross walks. They were pay duty for construction happening. I was waiting for…
I thank you in advance for the opportunity to share my concern here with you and also ask for help . I have a portfolio for 21 years, 16 years in class A / Z and with my Abastract / CVOR record both clean. I was stopped by an OPP on HWY 6 towards Tobermory, On just because I was above the allowed highway limit. According to the policeman, he told me that I reached 130km / h in an…
I can't find the category for this post so I'm posting it here.
Two questions...
1. Are golf carts considered a 'vehicle' under the Highway traffic act? I know carts can't drive across roads or on roads but if you try to bring one from the USA into Canada they are considered a 'vehicle'.
2. If you are on private property are you allowed to carry 'opened' alcohol in your golf cart? I know golf…
I was going southbound on 427 and exited at Queensway (Toronto). I needed to make a right turn and it is no right turn on red. So I stop on red light. There were 3 cars in front of me. I get the green arrow pointing right. So the cars turn right and when I was turning the green arrows just turned off. There was no amber. It just turned off. So I get pulled over…
Back on august 28th around 7 40 in the morning I got pulled over by a cop in a car that was not legally registered for the road yet, Stupid as it was i was literally just taking it for a drive on my street because it was sitting for so long My street is a residential street so i didn't think i cop would be turning on it anytime soon. But of course i got unlucky. He got me gave me 3 tickets. By…
I got ticket for failing to stop at stop sign in Toronto. i heard that the police officer must see the stop line, if there is one, from where he was sitting. That is exactly my case, Is it a strong case? If so do i need a picture to show that there is a stop line and a picture to show that he could not see the stop line from where he was sitting?
I got pulled over for disobey the "No Heavy truck" sign, on the ticket it say Highway traffic act Section 182(2), but I think I didn't disobey the "No Heavy Truck" sign, because my truck was loaded with delivery items(which at the time it was under 5 tonnes), I didn't request for disclosure, the cop that pulled me over didn't even check my truck to see if it is over 5 tonnes.
I picked up a brand new (old stock) Fuzzbuster a while ago at auction (wopping $5!!) and I want to mount it on the dash of my old GTO as a cool accessory when I show it at car shows. But I'm not sure if it's legal or not.
Here's my thoughts:
- It is early 70's technology (x-band) so it won't detect modern police radar. That's assuming no police force uses the old x-band frequency.
This morning I came downstairs to see my car with a ticket on it for $150 for parking in a fire route. The underground parking is under construction and we cannot park there so the tenates have to park either in visitors or adjacent streets. I have been parking in the same spot for a week and nothing was said to me until I found the ticket Sunday morning. I looked at every other car parked where…
Just bought my 1st GPS. Pretty decent little outfit. Have used it on a couple of short trips and got me to the destintation properly.
I have taken it to work recently and it is not as accurate as I first had hoped. The calculation of my vehicle speed is off by 2km/hr (GPS reads high). When stationary in many locations, it does not place me exactly where I am parked. On 2 different times it…
HI! So my husband was driving home at 2 am and blew out his back passenger tire which caused him to hit a parked car, he did quite a bit of damage to the car , there was no one around , and he did not have any paper to leave a note, also because it was a very old 1980 car and my husband assumed the damage was less than 1000,00 dollars and he left and did not report it until the next day. A week…
Issued in a news release by Toronto Police Traffic Services Sergeant Tim Burrows, these were the top 10 peeves of drivers in an on-line survey by the Toronto Police:
10. Slow drivers
9. Slower-moving drivers who pull into your lane when you're going faster
I received a speeding ticket this past weekend, and although the officer was nice and gave my 6yo a coupon for a free slushy, I want to fight the ticket.
The officer wrote the offence as "95km/h in a posted E0 km/h zone" the "E" being what looks like a written backwards 3. Now I know and you can probably guess he intended to write an 8 but that is not what is there it is an incomplete 8 and…
Quick run down of my situation: My liscence was suspended in early September for a DUI. Got caught driving last weekend on the 401. Officer claimed I was pulled over because she figured I was speeding and I looked suspicious because I was looking around in the car too much. She searched the entire car looking for weed - none was found. I was charged with driving while under suspension.
I wasn't quiet sure where this should go, so I am going to try here.
I am 25 years old, and I have had my G2 license since March 2010. I haven't upgraded to my full G only out of not really having the time nor cash to do it as of yet. In early February of this year I was pulled over by an OPP at a RIDE program and blew a 0.031 BAC. I was unaware at the time that I was supposed to have a BAC…
I was involved in an accident last month. I was proceeding along a street with cars parked adjacent to the curb. Approaching an intersection I saw a large truck and trailer parked against the curb (no brake lights, or turn signals) so I presumed he was parked there. I approached the intersection, following the same path as all the other traffic, just to the right of the centre line. When I…
I have received 2 pieces of paper on the door of my home within the last week. Looks like I am being summons to witness for an accident where the other driver was at fault last year. (He hit me and was charged at the scene).
I'm just wondering if anyone knows how many attempts they will make to serve me, or if they will keep trying until they do ?
I was charged 2 days ago with RED LIGHT - FAIL TO STOP and set fined $150 and I guess 3 points. I was driving turning left on the intersection with a traffic light, and when I jst about to turn left the light turned to orange and I didn't have enough time to stop. Once I turned I saw the light turned to red and 2seconds later I saw a police beacon flashing through my rear-view mirror. It…
Highway 21 is often closed in the winter. I and a lot of other people need to cross Highway 21 to get to work. Several people have told me that if a highway is closed, it's not only illegal to drive along the highway, but to cross it on any intersecting road, because while you cross it you're technically driving on a closed road.
Hi all, I was ticketed for this offense while on a bicycle where I "turned left" at a red light without first coming to a complete stop at the red light. It was a T-intersection where I was facing the straight through lanes (4 lanes, two in each direction) and a side street came in from the right only (2 lanes, one in each direction), and no vehicles or pedestrians were entering from the right at…
In early March I was driving in the Yonge & Churchil area. An officer said I failed to stop at a stop sign and ticketed me 110+3 demerits. While getting my license etc. I have multiple photocopy of my car ownership in my car, and that I thought I handed him the copy with the validation sticker on the back as required but gave him one of the blank copies by accident. He came back with…