![]() |
Re: The law and drink driving
Quote:
|
Re: The law and drink driving
I apologise for a typing error! Whooopseee!
|
Re: The law and drink driving
Police employees in this thread believe in the equipment they're given. They can only believe the information they have been given. Whether that information has been scientifically challenged is another matter.
For a true debate shouldn't this be answered by physicians/biochemists on the human/physiological front and analyst engineers/chemists on the equipment front? Interesting vaguely nonetheless. |
Re: The law and drink driving
Quote:
|
Re: The law and drink driving
I am not challenging the fact that the procedures have been challenged. All I am saying is that as an employee you are reporting this to me, and are not an expert in this field.
I would not expect a police officer to challenge every law, but to implement them. I do not think it is a police officer's job to be an expert in every or any field of law, and I expect them to be an expert at nothing apart from enforcing the law ;) Which I am sure you're all good at doing sensibly. |
The point I was trying to make is that the devices have been challenged and therefore the sciencey bit has already been done - hence why the intoximeter machines in the station are so accurate now.
|
Re: The law and drink driving
Quote:
Incidentally we don't prosecute for less than 40, where if the specimen comes back just one over you get done. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:47 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.