The DrugAlyzer has landed.... with a bang
About 30 percent of motorists tested in Mitchells Plain, Hout Bay and Sea Point tested positive for drugs in the field study using the drugalyser, launched officially on Tuesday. (from IOL)
In Sea Point, 59 percent of drivers stopped tested positive for alcohol, 35 percent for drugs, and 33 percent for both. In Hout Bay, 83 percent tested positive for alcohol, 33 percent for drugs, and 33 percent for both.
In Brackenfell, 70 percent tested positive for alcohol and 15 percent for drugs, and in Mitchell's Plain, 14 percent for liquor, 33 percent for tik, and 7 percent for both.
"The highest percentages of positive cases for the drug screens were (50 percent), recorded in central Cape Town."
These numbers cannot be believed.
The study with the DrugAlyzer was supposed to be random. This means that the high numbers are a function of police profiling. The Metropolitan Police put up a roadblock, walk down the row and pick out who they think "should be tested". This would include anyone 18-25 coloured, anyone looking inebriated, looking nervous? What do the numbers mean if the test was not random? What kind of study was this? What did it set out to prove? Whatever the aim might have been it wasn't to find out what "percentage" of people are driving under the influence...
What is the chain of evidence for the Drugwipe once the test has been started? Who looks after the Drugwipe once it is put in the horizontal position? A Metropolitan Policeman? I wouldn't trust a Metro Cop to do the security at a 5 year old's birthday party!
What steps are the operator expected to take to ensure that there is no cross contamination in subsequent tests?
Is this test not an invasion of one's right to privacy? Why have the police chosen to NOT inform the public that they have the right to not participate.
What compounds is the DrugAlyzer looking for as an indication that a person has consumed a drug?
What independent tests have been performed on DrugAlyzer to ensure that it will not identify an across the counter medication or prescription medication as one of the illicit drugs it is testing for?
How to say no....
Metropolitan Police officer: "Please swab this in your mouth"
You: "I decline to participate in your experiment. You do not have my consent to take a sample. Give me the number of the regulation, together with the number and date of the Government Gazette in terms of which are operating this machine. No law - No sample"
About 30 percent of motorists tested in Mitchells Plain, Hout Bay and Sea Point tested positive for drugs in the field study using the drugalyser, launched officially on Tuesday. (from IOL)
In Sea Point, 59 percent of drivers stopped tested positive for alcohol, 35 percent for drugs, and 33 percent for both. In Hout Bay, 83 percent tested positive for alcohol, 33 percent for drugs, and 33 percent for both.
In Brackenfell, 70 percent tested positive for alcohol and 15 percent for drugs, and in Mitchell's Plain, 14 percent for liquor, 33 percent for tik, and 7 percent for both.
"The highest percentages of positive cases for the drug screens were (50 percent), recorded in central Cape Town."
These numbers cannot be believed.
The study with the DrugAlyzer was supposed to be random. This means that the high numbers are a function of police profiling. The Metropolitan Police put up a roadblock, walk down the row and pick out who they think "should be tested". This would include anyone 18-25 coloured, anyone looking inebriated, looking nervous? What do the numbers mean if the test was not random? What kind of study was this? What did it set out to prove? Whatever the aim might have been it wasn't to find out what "percentage" of people are driving under the influence...
What is the chain of evidence for the Drugwipe once the test has been started? Who looks after the Drugwipe once it is put in the horizontal position? A Metropolitan Policeman? I wouldn't trust a Metro Cop to do the security at a 5 year old's birthday party!
What steps are the operator expected to take to ensure that there is no cross contamination in subsequent tests?
Is this test not an invasion of one's right to privacy? Why have the police chosen to NOT inform the public that they have the right to not participate.
What compounds is the DrugAlyzer looking for as an indication that a person has consumed a drug?
What independent tests have been performed on DrugAlyzer to ensure that it will not identify an across the counter medication or prescription medication as one of the illicit drugs it is testing for?
How to say no....
Metropolitan Police officer: "Please swab this in your mouth"
You: "I decline to participate in your experiment. You do not have my consent to take a sample. Give me the number of the regulation, together with the number and date of the Government Gazette in terms of which are operating this machine. No law - No sample"
Posts
1 comment:
Extract from the National Road Traffic Act shows the relevance of the drugalyzer. I would not like my family to die because somebody is hallucinating on LSD etc. There is also relevant law from the Drug and Drug Trafficking Act, where it clearly states that the use of the listed drugs is illegal. I would think this implies that any reasonable suspicion of breaking these laws can be taken a step further by a policeman.
CHAPTER XI
Reckless or negligent driving, inconsiderate driving, driving while under
the influence of intoxicating liquor or a drug having a narcotic effect, and
miscellaneous offences
Reckless or negligent driving
63. (1) No person shall drive a vehicle on a public road recklessly or
negligently.
(2) Without restricting the ordinary meaning of the word "recklessly" any
person who drives a vehicle in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of
persons or property shall be deemed to drive that vehicle recklessly.
(3) In considering whether subsection (1) has been contravened, the court
shall have regard to all the circumstances of the case, including, but without
derogating from the generality of subsection (1) or (2), the nature, condition
and use of the public road upon which the contravention is alleged to have been
committed, the amount of traffic which at the relevant time was or which could
reasonably have been expected to be upon that road, and the speed at and manner
in which the vehicle was driven.
Inconsiderate driving
64. No person shall drive a vehicle on a public road without reasonable
consideration for any other person using the road.
Driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or drug having
narcotic effect, or with excessive amount of alcohol in blood or breath
Post a Comment