I guess he should feel lucky he didn't get a finger jammed up his ass.

...AKA, Driving While Black!

I remember a Wayans Brothers movie (I don't remember which one) where they get arrested for "being black on a Friday night". This sounds similar!

PEACE!

After all, a black man must be guilty of something so a preventative arrest is always a good idea.

Even when we're caught red-handed being dumbass redneck racists, we stand by it!

Not.
It costs money to test for each possible recreational substance a person could have taken. Alcohol is just the most common intoxicant.

Each test on blood is for different classes of intoxicants and costs taxpayer's additional money. Judging from the video and the fact that he ran the stop sign, it is reasonable to suspect the man was intoxicated.
If an officer suspects a person is a danger on the road, then what should he or she do? Let the person go on driving?

If it was reasonable to suspect he was intoxicated it was reasonable to prove it, and without proof it's reasonable to do as he asks and clear the arrest from his record.

And that is probably what will happen.
I'm asserting that a guy running a stop sign and stumbling during a field sobriety test will make cops justifiably sus[picious and that they have an obligation to keep a person they suspect is intoxicated from driving, probably by arresting him.

I have diabetic neuropathy in my legs and there's no way I could walk and stand the way they check you. I don't drink.

There is no way I would pass a field test.

I don't drink and drive EVER. So should I just mail in my drivers license?

And running a stop sign could be as little as "pausing" at one.

The last time I drank any alcohol was over 30 years ago. I don't like it.

You support the criminalization of black skin. Good to know.

I am implying nothing of the sort.
I might as well say, "You support dangerous drivers killing children in our streets." But only an idiot would believe you support something so silly.

Really?

What world do you live in?

He blew a 0. Let him go.

You know, that whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing.

They either have to give up on the arrest, or prove he was intoxicated. They don't get a "kinda guilty" option.

After all he's black, so he was probably on drugs, right?

a day in jail, anyone THEY GUESS is impaired.

IMO a lot of us fall somewhere on the impaired chart. At least my kids would nominate me.

I guess you will jaywalk. . .here is your fine.

I guess you will take a drink. . .here is your dui.

I guess you will murder someone. . .here is your jail cell

After all, if the cops arrested you, you did something wrong. And we gotta feed warm bodies to the prison industrial complex.

This is bullshit. Wonder how many of those thirty percent are SOTW (something other than white)?

Listen to that asshole cop: "Nobody has just one drink..."

Well, except when they do.

I can't stress this enough.. there is NO compelling requirement that you have to agree, or will (legally) suffer consequences for refusal to submit to a field sobriety test. Those things are subjective, and even if you are absolutely clean, one little waver, or loss of concentration and BAM, you are looking at a DUI.

Instead, politely tell the officer, that you do not consent to a field sobriety test, and state that you don't agree with the subjective nature of them, but that you will consent to blood alcahol testing, or breathalyzer testing (especially if you are actually clean, if you know you won't pass testing, even though you will still have severe penalties for DUI against you, it may be better if you just refuse (your defense will have more to work with when representing you.. which is your right).

refusal to submit to a field sobriety test is An automatic 6 month license forfeiture.
The Implied Consent Law...

Also, "they" have the "right" to blood test you against your will. I forget the name of this "law" but it is used often.

In Texas, though, he could have been well within his rights to refuse without legal consequence.

http://www.west-texas-dwi.com/parts/fst.htm

if he didn't consent the police would have probably shot him and then staged a fake crime scene to act like he was a threat....im surprised they didn't just start firing at him just because he's black

the "politely tell the officer" thing ...

I am a white female and the first thing I did when I moved down here was put a "100 Club" sticker on my car. Those 2 things will likely give me a little goodwill up front. But I am not naive enough to believe a black female would get the same respect much less a black male. It is ridiculous.

A few states don't require you to do it, but in most of the rest you lose your license. And since it isn't considered a criminal act, you don't have any real way to challenge it.

Yeah, it's absolutely ridiculous and the laws should be changed.

ETA: Oh, and in some states refusing to take the test is seen as evidence of guilt.

They require a breath or blood test and if that is refused you can have a license suspension. The guy's problem in the OP was that he admitted alcohol consumption. That opens the door for the police to do everything else. Never admit anything. Not even "I just had one beer."

*especially* in BWB stops...

In a place like Texas, you may be right, but at least in a court room the poor guy would have a better chance if his lawyer makes the case that he'd declined to take the field sobriety test.

and then show me the photo of the cop bringing milk to people with the huge "smile" on his face.

... that means they're drunk driving?

Oh dear ....

It's happened to me at least once.
I know too little about this incident to judge whether race came into the situation, specifically, and I recognize that racial profiling is a serious problem with law enforcement. However, the only mention of race as a factor for this incident comes only from here. Even the defendant never mentions race.

But I doubt they would have hassled a white person the same way. In the 40 years I've lived in Austin I've seen the average cop go from fairly decent to the storm trooper mentality under our current chief.

I remember when Bill Clements was Gov. It was bad then as well.

But yes, the police have arrested me when I was sober, because I did not pass their field sobriety test to their satisfaction. As I'm sure you are aware, it is impossible to prove a negative. So the real question is whether he proved he was sober. This guy did not prove he was sober at the time of his arrest. He ran a stop sign and he stumbled during their field test.
He may have been sober, clean as a whistle of any and all intoxicants. But the truth is, I don't know, and neither do you.
The real question is whether the police arrested him because he is black. And so far, I haven't seen any evidence of that, except that he is black.

they could sell thousands of "whiskey" plates. I noticed in the past couple years that turning right on a red light seems to no longer require a stop in some peoples minds.

Shootings by the police have increased, mishandling of arrested people have been like the jogger the other day. He wants to do involuntary blood tests on anyone stopped by the police. He thinks he's head of Homeland Security.and has sent agents provcateur into Occupy Austin and Houston. I know of several undercover cops who were hanging around coffeehouses trying to stir up trouble until they were outed. Meanwhile traffic is godawful and they don't seem to do much about that.

Some things never change.

That's what we have now.

I realize many want to make this case about race, but it is not about race. For some reason Travis County is strict when it comes to drunk driving arrests. This is not the only person to be arrested for drunk driving based on questionable results. 30% of Travis County drunk driving cases are thrown out. This is more about a county using a when in doubt arrest policy.

after blowing 0.0?

However, this is not the only case in which someone was arrested for drunk driving without there being enough evidence to convict the person. As I mentioned in my previous post, in Travis County 30% of its drunk driving arrests are overturned. I would not be surprised if a number of the overturned cases involved white people. Also, I watched the video of his sobriety test. It seems to me that he failed the test.

They think racism doesn't exist.

Of course the people who think racism doesn't exist are mostly white people who have lived privileged lives.

Are you fucking kidding? Seriously? Honestly, I have yet to see anyone claim or even imply such on this site. I hate to say this, but please get a clue, fella.....SMH.

and it blinds even some sensible people.

the belief in "white privilege" does that exact same thing! But see, here's the thing: it actually does in most, if not virtually all cases. I can speak from personal experience in the matter.

They pretend to be colorblind. Which really means willful ignorance concerning the plight of minorities and non whites in this country.

For some who are not black or brown. NEVER, even when it clearly is about race.

Sick. Pathetic. Wrong. He ran a stop sign, but that was not GOOD enough for the arresting officers...no he MUST be drunk.

Austin, TX, police are constantly in the news for rogue behavior. Only last week they were in the news for questionable police practices and while I don't remember the details of that story they were involved last August in a questionable killing. In this case a man showed up at a bank during normal business hours only to find the bank door locked so he rattled the door to get the attention of a bank employee he could see inside the bank. Police were already on the scene due to an earlier robbery there and when the police approached the man took off running and the officer took off after him, firing a shot that hit him in the neck, killing him. It was the 6th police shooting in just over 8 months.

http://thewestsidegazette.com/austin-texas-still-in-uproar-over-police-shooting/

and juice the good citizens for money. Low tax states gotta find ways to get revenue.

The only corrective action these yokels understand.

Does the money come out of their pocket? Does the individual officer have to cough up the cash is what I'm asking? The answer in 99.9% of the cases is no. The Department coughs up the cash. They make it up by writing more tickets, raising taxes on the citizens serving them, and Government grants to buy new anti-terror equipment, of which there is no shortage of funds.

It is exceedingly rare that the cop who screws up has to pay. Worst case scenario they get a letter saying bad boy in their permanent record. The Horror.

We pay, you, me, and everyone else in the affected community. Nothing changes, and that is the terrible truth.

has an effect on modifying behavior, policies, etc.

who MIGHT be slightly impaired, but who HADN'T broken the law, off the road for public safety, why didn't you just ask him if he had a buddy that could come drive him home? No need to be a jerk.