Breathalyzer

#1
It seems some people have decided they are going to bring a breathalyzer into the unit and insist people submit to random testing before they leave the barracks, anybody who refuses goes in front of the CO. What is the legal stance on this, I was under the impression that only the police had the authority to force somebody to use a breathalyzer.
 
#2
vampireuk said:
It seems some people have decided they are going to bring a breathalyzer into the unit and insist people submit to random testing before they leave the barracks, anybody who refuses goes in front of the CO. What is the legal stance on this, I was under the impression that only the police had the authority to force somebody to use a breathalyzer.
If you don't drink and drive, what's the problem? Unless they intend to breathalyse people walking out out of the barracks. That would be wrong. :wink:
 
#3
dogfondler said:
vampireuk said:
It seems some people have decided they are going to bring a breathalyzer into the unit and insist people submit to random testing before they leave the barracks, anybody who refuses goes in front of the CO. What is the legal stance on this, I was under the impression that only the police had the authority to force somebody to use a breathalyzer.
If you don't drink and drive, what's the problem? Unless they intend to breathalyse people walking out out of the barracks. That would be wrong. :wink:
Why should somebody submit to something they are not legally bound to do? :wink:
 
#4
verticalgyro said:
dogfondler said:
vampireuk said:
It seems some people have decided they are going to bring a breathalyzer into the unit and insist people submit to random testing before they leave the barracks, anybody who refuses goes in front of the CO. What is the legal stance on this, I was under the impression that only the police had the authority to force somebody to use a breathalyzer.
If you don't drink and drive, what's the problem? Unless they intend to breathalyse people walking out out of the barracks. That would be wrong. :wink:
Not the point.

How would an individual know that their sample of DNA is not being taken by the Stasi for the Database?
Would it be much of a problem if it was??
 

Pararegtom

LE
Book Reviewer
#5
Unless it,s a police officer or customs officer, it,s not legal and if it,s random testing a warning must be given, by the employer.
 
#6
vampireuk said:
dogfondler said:
vampireuk said:
It seems some people have decided they are going to bring a breathalyzer into the unit and insist people submit to random testing before they leave the barracks, anybody who refuses goes in front of the CO. What is the legal stance on this, I was under the impression that only the police had the authority to force somebody to use a breathalyzer.
If you don't drink and drive, what's the problem? Unless they intend to breathalyse people walking out out of the barracks. That would be wrong. :wink:
Why should somebody submit to something they are not legally bound to do? :wink:
If you've done nothing wrong etc. etc.....
 
A

armadillo

Guest
#7
This is another example of Officers doing what they want however this is a deterrent and if it stops some muppet going out and killing someone good.

The breathalyzer in itself would not conform to PACE. You can refuse to have it done, but to stop it getting that far just blow.

Legality has to be proven, and as far as I can remember the MO is the only person on camp that can directly call you drunk and not fit for duty.

Army officers can do what they want,
 
#8
dogfondler said:
vampireuk said:
dogfondler said:
vampireuk said:
It seems some people have decided they are going to bring a breathalyzer into the unit and insist people submit to random testing before they leave the barracks, anybody who refuses goes in front of the CO. What is the legal stance on this, I was under the impression that only the police had the authority to force somebody to use a breathalyzer.
If you don't drink and drive, what's the problem? Unless they intend to breathalyse people walking out out of the barracks. That would be wrong. :wink:
Why should somebody submit to something they are not legally bound to do? :wink:
If you've done nothing wrong etc. etc.....
I don't drink and I still object to having to take a test if they are not legally allowed to administer it.
 
#9
verticalgyro said:
dogfondler said:
vampireuk said:
dogfondler said:
vampireuk said:
It seems some people have decided they are going to bring a breathalyzer into the unit and insist people submit to random testing before they leave the barracks, anybody who refuses goes in front of the CO. What is the legal stance on this, I was under the impression that only the police had the authority to force somebody to use a breathalyzer.
If you don't drink and drive, what's the problem? Unless they intend to breathalyse people walking out out of the barracks. That would be wrong. :wink:
Why should somebody submit to something they are not legally bound to do? :wink:

If you've done nothing wrong etc. etc.....
Papers Please!

You have done nothing wrong, nothing to fear, citizen!

Talk about paranoia!! You'll be saying that ID cards are a bad idea next!!
 
#10
armadillo said:
This is another example of Officers doing what they want however this is a deterrent and if it stops some muppet going out and killing someone good.

The breathalyzer in itself would not conform to PACE. You can refuse to have it done, but to stop it getting that far just blow.

Legality has to be proven, and as far as I can remember the MO is the only person on camp that can directly call you drunk and not fit for duty.

Army officers can do what they want,
Not sure if it still stands, but a service policeperson used to be able to diagnose drunkenness by breath, actions, gait and speech.
 
#11
Anyone can diagnose whether a person is drunk or not, but the person deemed drunk can only be charged if he's been breathalysed or had a blood test and been found to be positive.
 
A

armadillo

Guest
#12
HI DF,

Yes someone who was extremely dehydrated or suffering from a hypo has speech problems gait actions and sometimes you get a the smell of pear drops on there breath.

Normally the RMP will get a duty MO in straight away, part of the big umbrella.

As for non trained personnel operating breathalyzer equipment and getting it wrong and letting a driver go that is a whole different scenario.
 
A

armadillo

Guest
#13
Fallschirmjager said:
Anyone can diagnose whether a person is drunk or not, but the person deemed drunk can only be charged if he's been breathalysed or had a blood test and been found to be positive.
Didnt get the chance to read your reply, I stand corrected cheers for for straightening that one

A
 
#14
I remember that to drive out of Barker Barracks in Paderborn you had to sign out of the camp after 1900 (this is late 2008). By signing you were also stating that you had not been drinking. The Gd Rm Sgt also had a breathalyser on hand (not a police spec) which he could ask you to blow into if he felt that you had been drinking. Refusal to do so meant that the RMP/GCP were called. Any spikes on his machine also meant that Plod were called.

It was basically a deterrent. I have no idea how much of a deterrent it was, or how long the programme lasted.
 
#15
armadillo said:
HI DF,

Yes someone who was extremely dehydrated or suffering from a hypo has speech problems gait actions and sometimes you get a the smell of pear drops on there breath.

Normally the RMP will get a duty MO in straight away, part of the big umbrella.

As for non trained personnel operating breathalyzer equipment and getting it wrong and letting a driver go that is a whole different scenario.
Without wishing to be a pedant, someone suffering from a hypo will not have a pear-drop (or ketone) smell on their breath; that would be a hyper
 
#17
Fallschirmjager said:
Anyone can diagnose whether a person is drunk or not, but the person deemed drunk can only be charged if he's been breathalysed or had a blood test and been found to be positive.
Going back to mid- nineties, a person could be charged for drunkenness under those criteria (breath, actions, gait, speech. Army Act 1955). Thankfully, it seems to have changed.
 
#19
Had this carried out on us back in the day in Leconsfield when it was still ASMT. Anyone on parade who red lighted was RTU'd it was later stopped as it was found to be illegal as stated before it's only Police/RMP who can breath test.
Also has the person adminstering the test been trained on it?
I dont think leggaly it would be admissable in any court/CM
 
#20
Bloody hell.... some crazy replies there.

It DOES NOT take a sample of DNA that someone suggested, but a sample of breath :roll: which is not kept

The only person that can state you are drunk is a Police Officer as they are a professional witness on that and their word is final. Doesn't matter how much you have drunk one pint or ten, you can still be drunk depending on various factors! (Does not include military regs.)

PACE doesn't even come in to it, because if a question of your level of intoxicants on your breath was drawn into question you would be re-tested by a Police officer. And even then, they would have to have had witnessed you providing them with grounds for taking a sample as it can't be done randomly.

And with regards to samples taken by employers, you'll need to check your contracts cos you might find it stuck in there in small print...again not sure about military regs, but pretty sure there will be something in there about being fit for duty????
 

Latest Threads