Lhc- New Breath Testers For Boozers

[carbonmarine]

Authorities getting new BAC detection devices
BY MARK HALL
TodayÂ’s News-Herald
www.havasunews.com
Local law enforcement agencies will have a new tool to detect drunk drivers and boat operators.
Coming soon to the Lake Havasu City Police Department and the Mohave County SheriffÂ’s Office is the Intoxilyzer 8000, a smaller, more efficient version of the 5000, which is currently the accepted breath alcohol detection device throughout the state.
The state Department of Public Safety is working on a three-year, $1.8 million effort to phase out the 5000s.
The police department is looking to get a new machine in the next couple of months, but does not have a definitive date.
“We don’t foresee it for a month or two,” said Lt. Richie Sloma.
The Arizona Game and Fish is one state agency that has already obtained three of the portable devices for checking blood alcohol content (BAC), one of which could be in use on Lake Havasu or the Parker Strip by Memorial Day weekend.
“It’s our ultimate goal and intent to get these in operation by Memorial Day,” said Kevin Bergersen, boating law administrator with the Arizona Game and Fish Department.
Bergersen said that could depend on whether they would be able to get personnel trained to use the devices. Ed Jahrke, watercraft law enforcement manager with Game and Fish, said the new devices have many benefits over their predecessors, such as portability, timeliness and accuracy. “It’s really good technology,” Jahrke said.
He said the 8000s give the officer an opportunity to test the individual much more quickly. Currently, after numerous field sobriety tests, a suspect is then transported to some type of holding facility where an Intoxilyzer test is administered. During that time, the suspectÂ’s blood alcohol level can lower to legal limits, compromising the officersÂ’ arrest.
“You’re definitely working against the clock. The clock’s ticking and you don’t want to make a bad arrest. This will help expedite the process sooner,” Jahrke said.
The 8000 is a handheld device and is about the size of a laptop computer, while the 5000 is a large, stationary device.
In the state, Intoxilyzer and blood-drawn tests are the only alcohol-measuring tests admissible in courts.
You may contact the reporter at mhall@havasunews.com.

[fourspeednup]

How does the "intoxilyzer" determine correct BAC via breath if the suspect has just had a drink? There was a thread on this a few months ago where someone was detained with a BAC of around .11 but within a short time span tested at somewhere around .05
Isn't that why LE can't do an accurate test on the scene anyway?

[Boozer]

Originally posted by fourspeednup
How does the "intoxilyzer" determine correct BAC via breath if the suspect has just had a drink? There was a thread on this a few months ago where someone was detained with a BAC of around .11 but within a short time span tested at somewhere around .05
Isn't that why LE can't do an accurate test on the scene anyway?
It is to my understanding that the larger stationary devices are able to give an accurate bac reading even if you just had a drink. It is the smaller hand held units that the sherrifs have on their boats that give the innacurate readings.
Anytime you are asked to do a breathalizer you should refuse the test and demand that they do a blood test. There are 2 reasons for this. 1. The test is dead on accurate 100% of the time so if you're drunk you'll get popped if you're not then you won't get charged for something you're not guilty of. 2. Often times it takes a couple hours to get the blood test done so by the time they did it if you were border line DUI when they took you in for the test you are now in the clear. They may try to pull the bullshit of calculating the time you were takin into custody and factor that in with the current results but they only have the paper saying what it was when they got it and that's whats going to count in court.

[OGShocker]

Originally posted by fourspeednup
How does the "intoxilyzer" determine correct BAC via breath if the suspect has just had a drink?
Answer? (http://www.lion-breath.com/theory.htm)

[spectratoad]

So it is Henry's fault?:D ;)

[HCS]

I had one of those test done here on the Sac River. The boat cops
made everyone in the boat take the test to determine who they
were going to let drive. Because I was over the limit on the breath
test. They said if no one in the boat could pass the test, they would tow the boat in and not let anybody drive. They let my brother drive the boat because he was the lowest.
My bitch is, they handcuff me and took me to the local jail. There
I was tested again and I was way under the limit, so they let me go. I think they just use the test for an excuse to hassel people.

[Keith E. Sayre]

my understanding is that these machines measure the amount of alcohol in the air that is being blown out of your lungs. Since there is presumably alcohol in your bloodstream after it is absorbed in your stomach, this alcohol in your blood travels through your lungs and each time that you blow out a breath of air, some of the alcohol leaves your lungs and gets in the air and is then measured by the machine as you blow into it. The percentage of alcohol expelled with the air that you breath out
is the determining factor. If you take a drink and immediately
blow into a machine, it will only read high while you have alcohol
in your mouth, within seconds after you swallow the drink, the
alcohol in your breath evaporates and is undetectable. For this
reason, when you breath on someone after drinking, they smell
your air coming out of your lungs, not what is on your breath.
Keith Sayre

[HCS]

Originally posted by Keith E. Sayre
my understanding is that these machines measure the amount of alcohol in the air that is being blown out of your lungs. Since there is presumably alcohol in your bloodstream after it is absorbed in your stomach, this alcohol in your blood travels through your lungs and each time that you blow out a breath of air, some of the alcohol leaves your lungs and gets in the air and is then measured by the machine as you blow into it. The percentage of alcohol expelled with the air that you breath out
is the determining factor. If you take a drink and immediately
blow into a machine, it will only read high while you have alcohol
in your mouth, within seconds after you swallow the drink, the
alcohol in your breath evaporates and is undetectable. For this
reason, when you breath on someone after drinking, they smell
your air coming out of your lungs, not what is on your breath.
Keith Sayre
That's what happen to me.

[FRENCHIE]

im not planning on being one of the forst guienne piggs!:)

[Boatcop]

In general, we observe the driver for at least 20 minutes prior to having them blow into the intoxilyzer. That amount of time will allow all "mouth alcohol" from just taking a drink to dissipate.
I just completed training on the new 8000, and it is a slick piece of equipment. It has the ability to detect mouth alcohol, by registering a "spike" in the reading, and then stops the test. This makes it so the subject of the test cannot be falsely charged, by just taking a drink, or mouthwash, etc. When the machine shows that mouth alcohol is present, we wait 20 minutes (observing the subject) and test again.
It also has the ability to use information form the magnetic strip on Arizona Driver's Licenses, (not set up for CA DLs) so we don't have to manually input all the person's information. Our certification card also has a magnetic strip with OUR information so we don't have to type that in every time, too.
Don't confuse the intoxilyzer, especially the new portable 8000, with the "Preliminary Breath Tester" (PBT) that we now carry. The PBT results are not admissible, as the device is not certified for that purpose. All we can testify to is that the PBT recorded the presence of alcohol. By the time the PBT is used, the Officer already has determined whether the subject is impaired, based on the performance of the FSTs.
The PBT is part of the field sobriety tests. After the usual dog and pony show, we use the PBT to verify that alcohol that causing the impairment, and not some other substance.
Just for info, if you do take the PBT test, you still have to take the certified intoxilyzer test if requested. Failure to do so will result in an additional charge that carries a fine of $750.00 (which will have a $500 surcharge starting this fall.) This charge does not depend on whether you're found guilty or innocent of the OUI in court. You may be found not-guilty, but will still be found responsible for the refusal, and fined.
And after all that WE will request a search warrant and take blood anyway, so refusing is just a waste of money.
If we get the 8000s, we'll most likely use them in the lower river areas, where in some cases the closest intoxilyzer is more than 50 miles away. On the Strip, we have a 5000 at our Center, right on the water, so the distance and time to test isn't much of a factor.
They will probably be used more on the Lake, where the intoxilyzer is at Contact Point, Havasu PD, or MCSO Office, and could be some distance from where the stop is made.

[Rev. Ronnie]

Originally posted by HARDCORE-SKI
I think they just use the test for an excuse to hassel people.
Just another example of the man trying to keep you down!!!

[Jbb]

http://www.hotboatpics.com/pics/data/500/181rd_21.jpg

[Debbolas]

ok, dumb question.................
I know you cannot drink and drive a boat....are you allowed to have open containers in the boat as long as the driver isn't drinking? Or is it like a car, and no open containers are allowed anywhere.....
just wondering......
:)

[slink]

Alan, we just got the same training here in CA. are you sure about not reading CA. license. They told us that as long as the information is contained within the stripe it will read it no matter what state it was from (?). BTW a search warrant for blood? whats up w/ that. Case law in CA says we can force

[Boatcop]

On what basis can you obtain a warrant to take blood if you haven't done any field sobriety tests?
How long does it take to get a warrant?
We would only request the warrant if the person refuses to take the intoxilyzer test.
The itoxilyzer test is done only after we have established probable cause based on personal observations and field sobriety tests.
In the affidavit for search warrant we have to convince the judge that there is probable cause that a crime has been committed (Operating while impaired) and that the suspect of that crime possesses evidence of the crime (alcohol content of his blood). In the affidavit, we outline what his performance on the FSTs were and what our personal observations were.
If the judge feels there is sufficient probable cause, he will issue the warrant, and we will have a certified phlebotomist draw blood, using a special evidentiary blood draw kit. The sample(s) are then sent to the Arizona Crime Lab for analysis.
We do this telephonically, with the conversation between us and the Judge tape recorded. We basically read him the affidavit we have completed, and he issues the warrant. We then serve it on the subject and draw his blood.
The required time is only how long it takes us to complete the paperwork, and call the Judge. Usually within 15-20 minutes. We have a Judge on call 24 hours a day, not specifically for this purpose, but there is always a Judge available, 24/7/365.
BTW a search warrant for blood? whats up w/ that. Case law in CA says we can force
California's blood draw policy is based on either statute or case law in California, neither of which applies in Arizona.
ok, dumb question.................
The only dumb question is the one that isn't asked.
I know you cannot drink and drive a boat....are you allowed to have open containers in the boat as long as the driver isn't drinking? Or is it like a car, and no open containers are allowed anywhere.....
There are no laws in either California or Arizona that prohibit the driver of a boat from drinking an alcoholic beverage. However, if the driver of a boat is observed drinking or has an open container near the helm area, it, along with other observations, provides reasonable suspicion that the driver may be impaired, and we can do the whole FST thing, and arrest if we determine that he is, in fact, impaired.
I did this a few weeks ago on a stop for expired registration. The driver had an open beer and admitted to 2 beers. During the FSTs I didn't gain sufficient clues and probable cause that he was impaired, and he was sent on his way with the caution that if he continued to drink he would probably become impaired, which would put his boat and other boaters in danger. He chose to have his wife drive for the rest of the afternoon.
We aren't out there to hassle the peeps. We're out there to ensure that the boating experience is safe and enjoyable for EVERYONE. And part of that is to make sure that the boat coming at you is operated by a person who has complete control of his vessel, and won't make the wrong move due to impairment by his voluntary consumption of alcoholic beverages.
There are people who think that boating and drinking go hand and hand. But they are also the same people who'd be screaming "Why didn't the cops get this guy" when the drunk rams into them and kills or injures thir loved ones.
I read it here all the time, about some drunk that tried to dock his boat or something and ran into and scratched up this or that boat. The terms used are usually drunk idiot, drunk fool or names to that effect.
To some people it seems the only time drunks are unacceptable are when they specifically affect them.

[fourspeednup]

Good post boatcop, thanks for clearing up the issues. I don't usually post on these types of threads in support or against but I always read them and wait for someone with actual knowlege and experience on the subject to come on and tell us what's up:cool:

[MudPumper]

Alan, from what I have been reading, you have to have probable cause from observation to perform FST?? Example, either the person appears under the infl, or has alcohol within reach. I was stopped at the Havasu sand bar because somebody was on the deck of my boat and I have no bow rail. My problem was this, I was at idle approaching my buddies boat to tie up. Isn't it legal to have somebody on the bow if they are assisting in docking procedures??? This is the reason they gave for stopping me but then immediately brought me aboard to perform FST and made me take a PBT which read .00 because I was the DD. Anyway, what I am asking is do you have to have cause to perform the FST because I know for a fact I didn't give them any reasons to suspect me of this?????

[twistedpair]

Originally posted by Boatcop
Just for info, if you do take the PBT test, you still have to take the certified intoxilyzer test if requested. Failure to do so will result in an additional charge that carries a fine of $750.00 (which will have a $500 surcharge starting this fall.) This charge does not depend on whether you're found guilty or innocent of the OUI in court. You may be found not-guilty, but will still be found responsible for the refusal, and fined.
So let me get this straight. I can be 100% sober and tell you that I'm not taking any test, and be Fined?!?:eek: :confused:
Sounds rather Napoleonic to me. I can see that getting abused real easily. Not all cops are as non-ego driven as you Alan. There are plenty who will wreck your day just because they can.

[Boatcop]

I'm not going to comment on the actions of other Agencies or their Officers. I have observed first hand how some others enforce the OUI laws, and let me just say that I'm not impressed. Many of those who do what you describe are Officers who don't regularly work boats and are brought in on big weekends.
Things like minimal wakes in Copper Canyon, bow riding as you describe, and other minor stuff gets used as an excuse to shove a PBT in their face. Not following procedure is a sure way to get that case, and possibly future cases tossed out.
All I can say is how I train Arizona Officers and my own people. There are procedures to follow and I try to make sure they're followed. What others do is out of my control.

[Boatcop]

So let me get this straight. I can be 100% sober and tell you that I'm not taking any test, and be Fined?!?
We would have to have probable cause to arrest before you would be asked to take the intoxilyzer test. If you were 100% sober, then there wouldn't be any probable cause, so no intoxilyzer.
If you are arrested on the highway for DUI and refuse the intoxilyzer, you would lose your driver's license for at least a year. No licenses for boats, so there has to be some "incentive" for boat oerators to comply with the implied consent law.

[twistedpair]

Gotcha, I was assuming (and we all know what that word means) that the intoxilyzer was part of the probable cause process. Thanks for the clarification.

[Boatcop]

Damn double post. See the whole answer below.
Sorry 'bout that, Chief! :rolleyes:

[welk2party]

I tell you it scares the heck out of me. All this testing. It seems like a rolll of the dice and a matter of time before you get a PBT shoved at you while operating a boat.
It has got me so much that I maybe have a beer or two per hour. No partying when driving my boat. I have tried to get people to take turns being the DD but they never seem to follow thruogh. Sucks that I cannot be trusted to monitor my impairment to get jailed for a borderline OUI. NOT WORTH IT!

[Debbolas]

OT
What is the age that children don't have to wear life vests anymore?
Is it 12,13? Does it vary from Arizona to California to Nevada to Utah?

[Boatcop]

hey b/c,how many beers would i have to drink to show up on this breath thing?255lbs 6'2'
One!
The device is accurate to around +/- .002%. It also reads from .000% - .400%.
The only time it would matter is if it reads above .05%.
The reason I say .05% is that there are several presumptions in the law.
First, it states that a BAC below .05% presumes that the person is NOT impaired.
Second, it states that a person above .08% IS presumed to be impaired.
Third, it states that there is no presumption either way, if the person is between .05% and .079%. But that they can be found impaired based on other credible evidence, such as FSTs, driving pattern, etc.
Fourth, if they are driving a commercial vessel, such as a tour boat, water taxi, or shuttle boat (Casino for example) they are presumed to be impaired at .04%.
And Fifth, if they are under the age of 21, they are impaired at ANY measurable BAC. After all, if it's illegal for them to drink period, it's also illegal for them to drive (car or boat) with any alcohol in their system.
As far as any particular person and how much it would take them to register a specific BAC, there are too many variables. Gender, weight, food in their stomach, etc. all would factor in on what the BAC would be.
The only real constant is that a person will eliminate alcohol from their system at about .015% per hour. The AVERAGE person (taken from countless studies) gains .02% per drink. A drink being one 12 oz beer, one 4 oz glass of wine, or 1 shot (1.5 oz) of 80 proof distilled spirits.
So a person (average) could drink one beer per hour for 12 hours straight and be a .06%.
2 beers per hour for 6 hours would put them at .15%. Nearly twice the legal limit.
3 beers per hour for 3 hours would be .135%
This is based on the average of the general population, your results may vary, but this will give you an idea of how much and how long it takes to get to or above the limit(s).

[RiverPirate]

WE bought a portable breath tester from COSTCO years ago and still use it. if we think anyone is close. I don't know how accurate it is but when the alarm sounds someone else gets to drive.:D

[fourspeednup]

Originally posted by RiverPirate
WE bought a portable breath tester from COSTCO years ago and still use it. if we think anyone is close. I don't know how accurate it is but when the alarm sounds someone else gets to drive.:D
Those can be fun party gizmo's:D It's like the handicap system when betting at golf, it creates a level playing field as opposed to seeing how many drinks someone can handle:cool: