Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 42 of 42

Thread: Warrantless phone searches are go

  1. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Amsterdam/Istanbul
    Posts
    12,462
    Quote Originally Posted by Flixy View Post
    The tests don't even get you a positive result if you just had one beer, so i think the listerine is overreacting. For the record, they never do the straight line test here, ever. The casting a big net is a deterrent against drunk drivers, just like speed cameras are against speeders.
    Freshly brushed teeth give you a positive reading on a blow test. I have first hand experience of that. The reading was well over the legal limit where the last time I had touched any alcohol was 48 hours before (1 glass of wine).
    Congratulations America

  2. #32
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    6,435
    Yeah, but only right after right? We tested one at high school and all readings like that dropped very quickly after, so a second test shortly after was okay. And when the ANWB tested, a guy who had 8 or 9 beers still did not test positive..
    Keep on keepin' the beat alive!

  3. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Wraith View Post
    It takes ~2 minutes to clear out all evidence of the use of something like listerine naturally, and SOP is to provide a second test if the first test is positive a few minutes after that first test, which means that anything that could have thrown off the test will be gone. The second test is a blood test in some jurisdictions, I'm told. Fear that using mouthwash in the at some point during the day will make you show positive on these things is ludicrous.

    Calibration is separate issue, and one that I think is overblown.
    I remember reading about a lawyer who found that even minuscule amounts of alcohol present in the mouth, (it can appear much later if the person being tested burps) can throw a monkey wrench in the readings. In short, the breathalyzer was a great way of testing the amount of alcohol in the mouth, but not so great at testing the amount of alcohol in the blood.

    Of course, this was a godless defense lawyer, and he pretty much gets paid to lie.

  4. #34
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,064
    Another step too far in searches...

    Sigh.

    Jebus...so as long as the phone is not on my person it's safe??? Idiocy.
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

  5. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Hazir View Post
    Freshly brushed teeth give you a positive reading on a blow test. I have first hand experience of that. The reading was well over the legal limit where the last time I had touched any alcohol was 48 hours before (1 glass of wine).
    Try to wash it off then next time, silly mang. It's not meant to stay on your teeth or in your mouth.

    ...just like soap needs to be washed off the hands. I don't like the smell of your digusting soap, people! Aside aside: dove is great for people who love smelling like chemicals. It's nearly impossible to wash off.

    ...just like shampoo needs to be rinsed off. I don't like the smell of your apricot/nutmeg/chemical terror hair filling the room, people!

    God.

  6. #36
    So...if your phone has a password combination on it, are you obligated to give the police your code when they detain you?

  7. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    So...if your phone has a password combination on it, are you obligated to give the police your code when they detain you?
    I was wondering about that, or whether it would be legal for them to try and crack the phone if you wouldn't give them the password. As best I can recall, the legal opinions on that are still somewhat unclear.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  8. #38
    Theoretically, the password doesn't exist inside the phone, and neither do the unencrypted messages.

  9. #39

  10. #40
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    6,435
    I don't think you'd have to, since you don't have to provide them with your computer password either afaik.

  11. #41
    encryption and passwords are protected under the 5th amendment. We had a child porn case revolve that exact concept come to a close last year. The defendent lost, but the judge made it clear it was because the content was already viewable when it was inspected. He would not have been forced to hand over the information if the device was powered off or locked when it was inspected.

    However, the government is also allowed to copy your device contents, and if you don't provide the pass, I've seen nothing that says they are not allowed to brute force it.
    Last edited by Ominous Gamer; 01-07-2011 at 04:09 PM.

  12. #42
    Let sleeping tigers lie Khendraja'aro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the forests of the night
    Posts
    6,239
    Quote Originally Posted by Flixy View Post
    I don't think you'd have to, since you don't have to provide them with your computer password either afaik.
    It's different from country to country. In the UK, for example, you definitely have to hand over passwords to encrypted/locked devices.
    When the stars threw down their spears
    And watered heaven with their tears:
    Did he smile his work to see?
    Did he who made the lamb make thee?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •