Random Breath Testing: Did My Cop Stuff up?

RubenM on 09/09/2019 - 08:30

So I was at a wedding on Saturday and from 5pm to 10pm, I had six beers (Lashes, yum) and one shot.
Being an engineer, I entered it into an app to calculate my BAC, which said around 0.04 when I left, quite close to the limit, but not over.
Then after about 10 minutes, as luck would have it, I got stopped for a random breath test. The cop does the usual, asks for my licence, asks if I've had anything to drink, to which I respond "yes".
He then wants to do a breath test, but then decides to do the counting test first, even though we both assume it's a foregone conclusion.
I count, he looks at his machine and then says "You're free to go", I reply "Really?", he just says "Yes".

So did the cop stuff up, was his machine faulty or am I a strange human specimen?

Automotive

Comments

  • [Deactivated] on 09/09/2019 - 08:38
    +18

    If you said you drank recently they have to wait. He couldn't be bothered if you seemed sober.

    • Hithere on 09/09/2019 - 10:31
      +102

      OP was borderline and probably passed the attitude test and the cop was a decent person. It does happen.

      • spaceflight on 10/09/2019 - 16:22
        +4

        There is no borderline on the count to ten test.

        It gives a warning for alcohol on breath, that's all.

    • Bryanalves on 10/09/2019 - 16:43
      -1

      0.04 is under 0.05. He let you go.

  • Skramit on 09/09/2019 - 08:42
    +254

    I'm pretty amazed somebody would rely on some app to determine whether to drive or not, and then when it spits out 0.04 still choose to drive. The mind boggles.

      • Skramit on 09/09/2019 - 08:50
        +73

        How does the app factor in your BMI, liver function, genetics etc? Must have some advanced functionality!

        • RubenM on 09/09/2019 - 08:55
          +25

          It takes height, weight (BMI), gender and age, from memory.
          If anything, I slightly underestimated my weight and over estimated the alcohol in the beers (Lashes are only 4.2% and 345ml). So I have a safety factor of 20%, which to me, seems reasonable. Plus, I could have gotten an extra 15 minutes+ for my second test, had I blown over.

          On a side note: I rarely do this, usually my wife drives, but it was the odd occasion where she felt like a drink so I said I'd drive. I've also not lost a single demerit point, nor have gotten even a parking find in the past decade, so I'm fairly safe in general.

          • Seedy seed on 09/09/2019 - 09:02
            +12

            @RubenM: Your blood alcohol rises in the first hour after drinking. So that 15 mins likely wont help lol

            • Mrgreenz on 09/09/2019 - 14:58
              +5

              @Seedy seed: but after 5 hours of drinking his blood alcohol level is likely stable, assuming a reasonably constant rate of drinking

          • Skramit on 09/09/2019 - 09:03
            +6

            @RubenM: I'm not convinced :|

            I would prefer people erred on the side of caution rather than rely on some app that might get it right half the time, but equally might get it badly wrong the other half and make drunk people think they can drive.

            • RubenM on 09/09/2019 - 09:09
              +2

              @Skramit: I actually agree with you for the most part. I think that 0.05 is too high and it should be reduced to 0.03.
              But just like with tax minimisation, while I disagree with it in principle, I'll continue to use it while it's available.

              • Skramit on 09/09/2019 - 09:12
                +12

                @RubenM: I like a good controversial thread on a Monday morning. Well done.

              • bobbified on 09/09/2019 - 10:29
                +4

                @RubenM:

                I think that 0.05 is too high and it should be reduced to 0.03.

                Why would you think that?
                If you personally find that it's difficult to drive at 0.03, then why do you still go over?

                I wouldn't push myself "just because it's legal". I stop at where I still feel comfortable, not just below the maximum legal limit.

              • p1 ama on 09/09/2019 - 14:16
                +18

                @RubenM:

                But just like with tax minimisation, while I disagree with it in principle, I'll continue to use it while it's available.

                This is a horrible analogy. You don't kill yourself or others by minimising tax. You do driving drunk.

              • bmerigan on 09/09/2019 - 20:33
                +2

                @RubenM: Currently .08 in California!

          • Randxyz123 on 09/09/2019 - 10:54
            +5

            @RubenM: Those apps are rubbish. I’ve used one and a portable breathalyser.

            Guess which one I trust more. If you want to have some beers take a Uber home.

          • YellowDieselGolf on 09/09/2019 - 18:40
            +29

            @RubenM: ‘Straya. Where the designated driver only has 6 beers and a shot.

          • McMoots on 11/09/2019 - 00:37
            +3

            @RubenM: You don't "lose" Demerit points, you gain them.

            Hence, DEmerit.

          • nikey2k27 on 12/09/2019 - 08:53

            @RubenM: cop check profile on ipad you did not look drunk he just go i had that happen to me before too.

        • lunchbox99 on 09/09/2019 - 18:16
          +4

          Well he did say he was an engineer, not a medical scientist!

      • [Deactivated] on 09/09/2019 - 08:52

        Engineering and science disavow any association with BAC estimation. :p There will be a disclaimer. Does it use the accelerometer?

        • RubenM on 09/09/2019 - 08:58
          -3

          I obviously know it's not perfect, but it does give you a figure that should be in the right ballpark.

          • gromit on 09/09/2019 - 15:13
            +9

            @RubenM: yes and a ballpark of 0.04 would be safe to assume you are OVER. the margin of error is too great to assume that is safe.

      • Archi on 09/09/2019 - 09:32
        +16

        Judge: your guilty
        OP: but your honour .. the app said I could drive

        • TheBigShort on 09/09/2019 - 14:53
          +3

          Judge: You're guilty.
          OP: For what?
          Judge: For blowing under 0.05.. oh wait, you're not supposed to even be here.

      • TrumpisKing on 10/09/2019 - 11:29

        I don’t care what you think is science and numbers and all that 💩 if your relying on an app to tell you if your alright to drive then you are a irresponsible and dangerous individual who should have his license taken away from him. So many people drink and drive these days and cause so much havoc and you come on here boasting how you use an app and got away with it. Shame on you. Wake up to yourself. Next time you might kill someone.
        Drink and drive. Your a bloody idiot.

        • Bad Company on 10/09/2019 - 12:41
          +7

          Imagine if every driver is reasonable like the OP who leaves plenty of buffer for his calculated risk taking.

          The road will be a much safer place. I don't mean it in any sarcastic way.

        • tomleonhart on 11/09/2019 - 21:02
          +6

          I can’t help noticing the irony in calling someone “a bloody idiot” and yet can’t spell “you’re” 😂

    • GoldenDragon888 on 09/09/2019 - 09:21
      +5

      This is why the OP would be a great engineer. It’s all about risk and and efficiency (laziness).

      During my uni years I would do this all the time. It was harder as I was on my Ps when it 0.02. I drunk 8 bottles of Hahn light during a 4 hour period. I stopped drinking 1 hour ago, am I okay to ride my motorbike. Probably should wait another 3 hours.

      The same with exams. If I walk out of the exam now will I pass? I have answered 75% of the exam and would have about ⅔ correctly answered so probably a pass but with margin or error a pass conceded at worst. So this assignment is only worth 6% of my total but the effort seems require work that would be for a task worth 20%.

      • Levathian on 09/09/2019 - 13:48
        +4

        Haha that wouldn't work with optometry. Oh you got 49.5% on the exam? Congrats, you just failed the whole unit, see you again next year. And no units for you next semester- everything is a prereq.

        • RubenM on 09/09/2019 - 13:52
          +5

          Ps make degrees!
          49.5% could be a PC or a fail, depending on your WAM. That's what it was when I went to uni over a decade ago anyway.

          • Krankite on 10/09/2019 - 07:17
            +1

            @RubenM: At the very least its good enough to get a resit

      • jcm123 on 10/09/2019 - 23:11
        +2

        Playing fast and loose with human life does not a great engineer make. I guess he'd fit right in at Boeing.

    • [Deactivated] on 09/09/2019 - 22:47
      -1

      Interesting point.
      I would probably error on the side of caution of being closer to 0.01-0.02 (the equivalent of 1 drink) before I drive.

      Alcohol absorption (how much your BAC increases after 1 drink) and metabolism (how quickly your body gets rid of alcohol and how quickly your BAC drops) vary quite a bit from person to person.

      What we need is standard deviations or confidence intervals with these estimates. so we say there is a 95% chance your BAC is between 0.0-0.5.
      I'm sure it would be there in the original studies which worked out formulas for prediction. (Add to my list of things to do).

      On unrelated noted your avatar is broken. (It's blue…)

      • Skramit on 09/09/2019 - 22:50

        I took the red pill.

    • Whomastadon on 11/09/2019 - 18:17

      The app doesn't mean shot.

      It's just an excuse people will try to use when they get done drink driving.

      " But the thing said I was ok sure ?!?! "

  • one man clan on 09/09/2019 - 08:52
    -4

    Unless you way 150kg you would have definitely blown over.

    I've always presumed that the counting testers do a rough analysis and if it indicates you're within a reasonable range they do the straw test.

    • RubenM on 09/09/2019 - 08:56

      Between 115kg and 118kg, 6'6" or 198cm. Shot wasn't 30ml, maybe half that.

      • one man clan on 09/09/2019 - 08:57
        +9

        Ok you're a big boy! Makes sense you wouldn't blow over then. Probably came pretty close.

      • aboabo on 09/09/2019 - 09:12
        +3

        You had half a shot. Shoulda said.

        • [Deactivated] on 09/09/2019 - 22:47
          +1

          it was implied

    • FareEvader on 09/09/2019 - 14:08
      +3

      What exactly is a counting test?

      • spaceflight on 10/09/2019 - 18:47
        +1

        It is a screening test that detects alcohol on breath. It is a positive/negative test there is no value given.

        If it is positive you blow into the straw.

    • KLoNe on 09/09/2019 - 17:01
      +9

      He's an OzBargain member, very good chance he's over 150kg.

      • Oofy Doofy on 11/09/2019 - 12:39

        He's an OCAU member, so definitely over 150kg.

  • dapt on 09/09/2019 - 09:08
    +58

    You're a crap engineer and a worse person, you put yourself and others at risk driving drunk.

    • Skramit on 09/09/2019 - 09:12
      +23

      I've reported him to the FBI.

      • Wiede on 09/09/2019 - 15:11
        +5

        I reported him to FSB also

        • ProlapsedHeinous on 09/09/2019 - 22:19
          +4

          I dobbed him into ASIO via strippergram. Helps them remember better

      • Quantumcat on 09/09/2019 - 09:16
        +74

        Do you only drive completely sober?

        I do

        • RubenM on 09/09/2019 - 09:54
          -3

          I commend you for that.

        • tessel on 09/09/2019 - 12:15
          +1

          MVP. Respect.

      • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 09/09/2019 - 09:42
        +15

        I do as well.

      • Bad Company on 09/09/2019 - 09:43
        +35

        Does the idea of only driving completely sober seem strange to you?

        • RubenM on 09/09/2019 - 09:55
          +3

          No, 99.99% of the time when I drive I'm completely sober.

          • Bad Company on 09/09/2019 - 10:03
            +18

            @RubenM: I understand calculated risks are what engineers do all the time, and what you did was perfectly reasonable.

            It's just humans are emotional creatures. Reason is a luxury. So be prepared for all the condemnation!

            I'd rather someone like you taking a calculated risk, than some negligent driver making mistakes without realising them. If only every drink driver is like you. The road will be a lot safer.

            • mattsamp on 09/09/2019 - 18:45
              +2

              @Bad Company: I think the issue here is that it's not just his calculated risk, it's a calculated risk for the other people using the road at the same time (which they didn't agree to take).

              The guy had an RBT and passed, so I don't think there's a problem here. But, if an app says you're close to the limit (the limit being an arbitrary line, over which you're assumed to be a danger to yourself and others) and your response isn't "let's sit down for an hour and drink some waters", it's "chuck us the keys", then there's a bit of arsehole to your attitude.

              • bmerigan on 09/09/2019 - 20:40
                +1

                @mattsamp: At that level it's more a calculated legal risk than a calculated public risk. In California the limit is .08 thus even .06 would be considered 'safe'.

              • Bad Company on 10/09/2019 - 08:32
                +8

                @mattsamp: Actually the public around him did agree to take said risk, since the legal limit is below 0.050, anything up to that point is deemed acceptable. Every driver on the public road have to agree to the road rules prior to holding a licence, therefore by extension they agreed to put up with drivers with a BAC of less than 0.050.

                Since OP said he left plenty of margins of error, he was just taking a legal risk that may see him blow a little over 0.049, rather than public safety risk where he drives drunk.

                Like I said before, I wish every drink driver is like the OP.

          • salmon123 on 09/09/2019 - 12:50
            -1

            @RubenM:

            No, 99.99% of the time when I drive I'm completely sober.

            I find that that to believe for anyone that's a regular drinker. 99.99% = 3.65 days/year you're driving after a drink, just seems very low. You might be diligent about taking public transport/taxi after having a drink, but you have to remember you might still have a detectable amount of alcohol in your blood the following morning.

            Something like 95% might be more believable.

            • Save 50 Cent on 09/09/2019 - 13:09
              +2

              @salmon123: Actually it is 0.0365 days a year.

            • RubenM on 09/09/2019 - 13:09
              -1

              @salmon123: It'd actually be 0.0365, which is possibly a fraction low, but it wouldn't be any more than once a year, likely much less.
              I drink maybe once a month on average.

              • Exorcist on 10/09/2019 - 10:34
                +1

                @RubenM: I also brutally murder someone every 40 or so years, people hardly notice, no biggie

                • RubenM on 10/09/2019 - 10:36
                  +1

                  @Exorcist: While staying within the law?
                  Tell me more.

                  • Exorcist on 10/09/2019 - 10:43
                    +1

                    @RubenM: Yeah of course, just say its a mental health problem, I bet the cop won't even question you

      • onetwothreefour on 09/09/2019 - 10:23
        +3

        I only drive when completely sober, OK in my young 20's I did drive probably over the limit a couple of times but I'm not proud of it and I certainly didn't feel the need to boast about it on an internet forum.

        • RubenM on 09/09/2019 - 10:33
          +4

          Evidently, I didn't drive over the limit.
          Nor did I think I was boasting, more perplex of why I didn't get a proper breath test.

      • pjcook on 10/09/2019 - 07:27

        Yes

    • GoldenDragon888 on 09/09/2019 - 09:23
      +4

      Actually he would be a great engineer. A great combination of risk calculation and efficiency (laziness)

      • HighAndDry on 09/09/2019 - 10:14
        +4

        Yeah - OP's an engineer, not a physicist. It's all about practical application. And practically, he was under the limit and evidently able to drive. Seems like that'd pass muster in any other context - not perfect, but within tolerances and able to perform the required function.

    • brad1-8tsi on 09/09/2019 - 09:56
      +7

      He wasn't drunk in the eyes of the law. if he'd blown over the police would have had him on toast.

      Have you ever been at a measured 0.049? I have and you would not think from both the personal perception and external observation that a drink had been taken. This is why f-wits that do feel drunk should have the book thrown at them.

      • spaceflight on 10/09/2019 - 18:48

        He wasn't drunk in the eyes of the law. if he'd blown over the police would have had him on toast.

        How do you know?
        They never did a breath test only a screening test

        • rogerm22 on 10/09/2019 - 21:44

          A screening test which he would have failed if he was drunk.

          • spaceflight on 11/09/2019 - 12:19

            @rogerm22: No he would have failed a screening test if it detected any alcohol on his breath.

        • brad1-8tsi on 11/09/2019 - 07:54

          It's a go/nogo test. If he was over 0.049 he would have given a "fail" reading which then would have required an evidentiary test.

          Even if he passed the first test, if the officer suspected the driver was under the influence of alcohol he can do a 2nd test.

          • spaceflight on 11/09/2019 - 12:21
            +1

            @brad1-8tsi:

            It's a go/nogo test.

            That's correct

            If he was over 0.049 he would have given a "fail" reading.

            That's incorrect.
            The count to ten test is an indication test only. It detects any alcohol.

            If it gives a positive result you blow into the straw.
            If that detects over 0.049 then you do an evidentiary breath test.

    • SnakeCasablanca on 09/09/2019 - 11:43
      +9

      He was under the limit and driving within the legal parameters. Get off your high horse mate.

    • bmerigan on 09/09/2019 - 20:27
      -2

      Except he wasn't, so maybe you're a crap person

  • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 09/09/2019 - 09:34
    +37

    As someone who has experienced a friend lose a limb and their career due to a drunk driver, I think you're crazy to go to a wedding and take your car.

    Buy an actual breathalyser if you ABSOLUTELY NEED to drink then drive. Or just taxi/uber like the rest of us.

      • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 09/09/2019 - 09:43
        +12

        as the BAC can rise a while after drinking,

        So wait longer.

        Or again - just don't drive.

      • p1 ama on 09/09/2019 - 14:14

        I wasn't sober, but I wasn't drunk either.

        Sorry, but this is not an impossibility. You are either sober or you are drunk.

        • RubenM on 09/09/2019 - 14:17
          +4

          Okay, in the eyes of the law, I was sober then.

          • p1 ama on 09/09/2019 - 15:50
            +2

            @RubenM: No…you were drunk, just not drunk enough to not be allowed to drive.

    • [Deactivated] on 09/09/2019 - 09:43
      +2

      I only ever drive 0.00, but once when out we all paid for the breathalyser at a club and I blew well under others and under 0.05 when I could barely walk. Personally I would never drive even at 0.025. I think BAC mileage varies.

      • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 09/09/2019 - 10:03
        +2

        Those machines in the clubs are junk to generate profit. Probably never been serviced or calibrated. I wouldn't trust them anymore than the condom vending machine next to it with unknown years old rubbers in it.

        Actual handheld devices with a fuel cell sensor are fairly accurate.

        • BewareOfThe Dog on 10/09/2019 - 21:02

          I used to sell 99$ breathalyzers, then discovered they had to be calibrated every 12 months, and cost $75 + postage each way.

    • trapper on 09/09/2019 - 11:58
      +3

      He was not drunk.

  • [Deactivated] on 09/09/2019 - 09:52
    +6

    A good engineer would have taken into account other factors and probably be dissatisfied with the open ended answer and bought a breath tester instead.

    • rompastompa on 09/09/2019 - 10:00
      +5

      And insisted the police officer uses their breathalyser to confirm or deny the app findings.

  • [Deactivated] on 09/09/2019 - 09:57
    +4

    Cop dodged a bullet here

  • boomramada on 09/09/2019 - 10:09
    +2

    With your engineering degree, why not taking to high court? instead of Ozb?

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join