« lot's of leche | Main | Well, it's not the Rolling Stone.... »

I passed the test, but now what?

by anna at 03:40 PM on July 24, 2004

So yeah, I been away at the Outer Banks in North Carolina. Tobacco is the lifeblood of that state. It seems like everybody smokes. Signs in restaurants boast of a newly formed non-smoking area. You can smoke while pumping gas. And at least in the resort itself, one sees no people of color. It prompted me to muse aloud whether these southern yahoos restrict them to the Inner Banks. The utter whiteness of the place was downright eerie.

We stayed in a house owned by a friend's parents. The friend is mainly a friend of my wife's, as I have no friends. She warned me that there were certain issues, mostly stemming from a tragic car accident that killed our host's friend in these very same Outer Banks six years ago. For instance, there will be no driving at night which pretty much precluded eating out.

This house was located in a small enclave in Kill Devil Hills. As a matter of fact, it is located in the very same enclave as the one where one Melissa Marvin got totally toasted and ran a red light and killed four teenagers. Her trial was on Court TV. In an emotionally-tinged verdict the jury heaved the book at her. She'll get out when Hell freezes over.

So due to this confluence of factors we mostly drank Margaritas from a blender in this fine home. But I had a hankering to go out to dinner on our anniversary, which was 7/23/04. That day it rained, so we fished off the dock and sipped beers. The friend had a daughter the same age as my son and the budding/awkward thing with them is worthy of a whole nother post. But the whole time I was fishing/drinking I was acutely aware of all the above facts, in addition to the fact that the police we constantly pulling people over for no apparent reason on the only road out of that enclave. Consulting a chart, I calculated that I'd be okay with four beers in a 3 hour period. But I also took a big swill of a Margarita just before we left. Bad move?

No. As my wife and I departed for our anniversary dinner, we soon approached an all-too familiar checkpoint. Every driver in either direction was being stopped and asked to show ID etc. If the officer detected any odor of alcohol or pot, problems ensued. That's what happened with us. He asked if I'd had anything to drink and I told the truth. He administered the pre-lim breath test, with which I am very familiar from prior arrests.

He looked at it and seemed quite disappointed at the paltry .005 result. Not to be deterred from his vital citizen harrassment mission, he said there was a strong odor of alcohol emanating from our vehicle. Did I mention that my wife, knowing she wasn't driving, had downed several drinks while on VA-K? He asked to search our vehicle and we consented, glad to oblige and end our contact with his corn-fed ass. This inbred, cheap sunglasses-wearing yahoo then tore our spotless car to pieces, warned me that one more drink "prior to reaching your final destination, si-ir" could result in DI-AAARE CONSEQUENCES."

Yay! I had passed my first Breathalyzer test with flying colors, after failing several in my (much) younger n' wilder days (nowadays I don't drink n' drive, I just trip n' drive, there's no test for LSD-25.)

Oh, I felt so proud of my self-restraint and foresight. But then I started brooding about the trivial fact that my Constitutional rights had seemingly been stripped away from me in the name of those four teenage victims. Specifically my absolute protection from ANY cops doing search and seizure operations, which fecklessly examining the contents of my bloodstream and personal property most certainly are, in the absence of probably or for that matter any cause to believe that a crime had been committed. By my very presence in that benighted, trailer-park, saloon-infested area I was presumed guilty. I presumed that the constant parade of people on motorized scooters and mopeds to/from said trailer parks and bars were too.

What do you think? Should the cops be allowed to do this or not? Why?

comments (8)

What do you think? ...

I think that the answer is pretty clearly no. Going back to one of your recent posts, I think we pretty well established that if people aren't driving dangerously or giving any other indication that they are drunk, they are probably either not drunk, or they are legally drunk and not a threat because they have experience driving while mildly intoxicated, or they have super powers, or what have you.

As you mentioned, we have that whole protection from unreasonable search and seizure that those wacky founding fathers set up for us.

So, if there is no indication that a person is a problem or threat, and we enjoy protection from unwarranted stops and searches, then it is improper to be searched in the case you mentioned. At best, it could be called harassment, and, at worst, it could be called unconstitutional.

On the other hand, it is a good cause (TM), and I'm sure the policy is whole-heartedly supported by the citizenry. Police are civil servants, and, as such, respond to the wishes of the public. If people don't like it, it's as easy to get to rid of as just letting the city council or whomever know that they're tired of it and it will be changed.

by Mike Sheffler at July 24, 2004 6:13 PM

Heh. You mentioned that there is no test for LSD-25. When I graduated from high school, I left the state to go to college while many of my friends stayed in Spokane (in order to most effectively waste the next several years of their lives).

One of my friends was a big fan of acid, and he got lots of my other friends into acid while I was away. Just about their favorite thing in the whole world was to go for a car ride while they were tripping hard, but they were a little too scared to drive themselves around while high. Hence, when I would come home for Christmas break, I would be appointed chauffeur, and was charged with driving all of my friends wherever they wanted to go.

I'd pile three, four, sometimes even five other people into my car and we'd set out. There were required stops, like the falls, Riverfront park, and the freeway, as well as some other attractions that I would decide on at game time. The whole affair would usually last only an hour or so, but they were invariably starving at the end, so we'd head over to Rosauer's (a northwest grocery store) so I could pick food while they would run around the aisles, picking stuff up, knocking stuff down, and generally appearing high.

It was a pretty challenging exercise in babysitting, but it was usually enough fun for me too that it was worth it.

by Mike Sheffler at July 24, 2004 6:48 PM

What is the (TM) stand for, trademark?

I think authorities serve duel masters, upholding even inconvenient parts of the Constitution 1st and placating public opinion second.

In rereading this I note that I typed "probably" when I meant "probable." A drunken mistake, no doubt.

Mike, I was once present while a perplexed cop tried to figure out what to do with a tripping driver who seemed a bit hyper but not slurrring words or staggering and who blew a .000 BAC. Eventually he just let him go.

by anna at July 25, 2004 8:36 AM

I love u