Wow...just wow.

This video explains why you never admit to drinking anything. As soon as you do and take part in any of the tests, they are just going to fail you and let you fight it in court.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33AsZh0oma8

*controversy

Adding video to channels (Controversy) - requested by MrFisk.

True, cops don't take math in the academy. Good thing, too, or I'd have flunked out.
But this cop sounds like he's trying too hard and his bad language makes him sound unprofessional. But I agree, don't admit to anything and don't blow into the damn thing cause it ain't admissible anyway.

and here I just was commenting and defending us officers on the other "police state" video (where law enforcement handled it properly) and then here comes a video like this.

Only thing to say is the cop made a mistake and obviously become completely flustered by it as he probably knew he was being filmed. This does not give him the right to be an asshole. I have to ask what is the age of the male that is taking the PAS (preliminary alcohol screening) test? If he is under 21 there is a no tolerance policy towards underage drivers with alcohol in there system. He could of blew .01 and still be arrested. Anyone under the age of 21 should not be consuming alcohol (I know I know, we all did it) but if you do, DON’T DRIVE.

That being said, just a few notes so everyone knows (may only apply to California). In California (and I believe everywhere) you can be under the legal limit of .08 BAC and still be arrested for a DUI. There are two subsections of the Vehicle code for a dui, VC 23152(a) and VC 23152(b) which are usually both charged. The B section is only for if you are over .08 BAC. The (A) section can be used if you are driving erratically or unsafely even if under the legal limit. That section is also used for when driving under the influence of a drug (pot, prescription meds, etc..). 9 Times out of 10 in court the charge of VC 23152(A) will get dropped to a wet and reckless which is treated like a DUI but with fewer consequences.

Now, please do not take the advice of these other people and refuse all testing (in California). In California, there is a law called Implied Consent, please read here:

http://dui.drivinglaws.org/resources/dui-refusal-blood-breath-urine-test/california.htm

but to sum it up, you have to give breath, blood, or urine when arrested with probable cause for a DUI. This may not sound fair but it was put in place so people could not refuse all testing then go to court and argue there was no proof of their intoxication. There are penalties if you do not give samples so please read that link. This law can help both ways, as an example if you really are not under the influence of alcohol or at least under the legal limit, then the blood test (most accurate) will show this. This will either liberate you in court showing you were not intoxicated as the officer said or at least get your DUI dropped to a wet and reckless if you were under the influence but at a legal level. Of course, if you were really under the influence or got into a DUI crash nothing is really going to help you but a good lawyer.

Just as an example, a woman was stopped for making an illegal U-Turn. Before this officers admitted she had been driving ok. Once officers pulled her over to issue a citation they immediate smelled alcohol coming from the car and her person. The female agreed to a breath test and blew a .38 BAC! For most people including guys, you would be unconscious if you had that much alcohol in your system. The woman was charged for a DUI but more importantly got alcohol counseling because the court ordered it. This is just an example of times where people who drink on a regular basis (alcoholics) may not show signs of alcohol impairment. They are such sever alcoholics who can function to an extent while intoxicated. That DUI arrest probably saved the women’s life.

All I am trying to say is I know it may seem unfair or prying to have an implied consent law here in California. All it is meant to do is to encourage people when they go out to drink to please GET A CAB or SOBER driver to take you home. Sober does not mean you “feel” sober, sober means no alcohol or you have followed the guidelines issued by California DMV on how many drinks / how many hours it takes to be sober enough to drive.

Lastly, I will say there are ways of helping yourself during a DUI situation so educate yourself and do some research (not that rusty penny or mustard or barely blowing your breath crap) if you are really worried that one day you’re going to be pulled over after consuming alcohol.

d'awww he's in "calc 3" I remember when I was a baby, too...

also: d'awww h had "2 beers" I remember when I was a baby, too...

Anyone admitting to "a couple a beers" has had considerably more.

Anyone who has had "a couple a beers" would have the presence of mind to say they don't drink.

The proper answer to "How much have you had to drink tonight?" is "Ask my lawyer". That's the proper answer to any question besides "What's your name?" Anything else opens you up to investigation, prosecution, and/or the cop lying about what you said.
Also, when they ask you "would you mind if I ...." or "Do you have a problem with me doing ...." answer "yes, I mind". You are not under any obligation to give up your rights because the cop asked you to. Only lawful COMMANDS must be obeyed, not requests. They know this full well, but also know that most people think they are being commanded when told things like "I feel like there's something in your car, so I'm going to search it, OK?" and agree to it. If the command wends with "OK?" it's not a command, it's a request, and the smart thing to do is ignore it.

Some people tell the truth, others lie.

These days, if I've had more than a couple I try not to drive for a few hours. If I've had a couple beers I say I've had a couple beers. Anyone smart enough to restrict themselves to a couple beers should also be smart enough not to take the risk of lying to a police officer.