• KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      you think those people are required to do them? One of the primary tests doesn’t even require you to move. 50% of the other two are literally counting.

      And like i said, you can just hit them with the blow test? Or blood like i mentioned, that’s a particularly good one.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        In some states refusing the circus act is an automatic DUI. Even if you ask for a blood test. We have the technology to just do away with it. And dyslexic people can drive just fine while fucking up the numbers and alphabet. It just needs to go.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          that is pretty silly, though idk much about the specifics of it, really it should only mean you get arrested/detained, it shouldn’t be possible to charge you with something that isnt proven.

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            It shouldn’t. And yet it is. That’s not even the worst use of that though. Cops can beat you up and arrest you for resisting arrest at any time. And that generally comes with jail time.

            • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              well i mean resisting arrest is quite literally illegal, so that would make sense, considering that if you’re evading arrest, you probably have a reason to be doing so.

              Though you also have to resist arrest for that one to happen. Otherwise it’s unlawful use of force.

                • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  in reality they can roll up to you and tell you that you’re under arrest, which means you have to comply legally. The actual proceedings of being arrested and charged take place later, so that’s where that would be disputed.

                  If you were to resist, that’s literally illegal. Therefore police have the right to use reasonable force against you (which is often defined as a proportion of your resistive force)

                  If you don’t resist, and they do use force on you, there is almost definitely a case that you can hold against them for unreasonable force.

                  • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    6 months ago

                    Mmhmm. Sure. And the second that cop gets on the stand and swears they did nothing wrong you’re going to jail.

                    If the only charge is resisting arrest then it’s a corrupt abuse of power on its face. What you’re saying sounds reasonable as a thought experiment but in reality we have warrants for a reason. We have constitutional rules about due process explicitly because these powers were already abused.

                    Allowing police to just declare you’re going to jail for a year is a massive fucking breach of our rights.