you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 8 points 2 weeks ago (10 children)

I'm pretty sure that if they find a person drunk they have to take that person to a hospital to get a blood test and accurately gauge the alcohol percentage, the test also stands as proof.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 week ago (9 children)

    If you were accused of murdering and taken to the hospital for a blood test with a lawyer present people would lose their minds

    But suspected drunk drivers it happens all the time without a lawyer present

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    Because these are two different things, if you're accused of murder they can use whatever you say against you, but in case of drunk driving it doesn't matter what you say, what matter is the results of the test.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (1 child)

    The courts have ruled we have the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney.

    If you do that they then simply charge you with another crime.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago

    I agree that traffic rules enforcement is not being done in the most fair way but it kinda works.

    Let's say they somehow manage to have lawyers present at the hospital in case of drunk drivers, how would a lawyer help suspected drunk drivers?

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (6 replies)
  • load more comments (6 replies)