789
Woman in ad who said a Democrat endangers kids pleaded guilty to endangering kids
(www.washingtonpost.com)
this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2026
789 points (99.5% liked)
Not The Onion
22807 readers
1012 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Please also avoid duplicates.
Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's not a discrepancy, alcohol is processed over time. It's her body working through the stuff in the ~30 mins or so that it presumably took to get to booking her. Yeah we can assume the levels aren't 100% accurate but this tech is decades old so probably pretty close. There are many problems with policing; imo this isn't one of them.
Once the cops have someone on a DUI pulled over, its probably a relief to see them blow something so high because they know they have enough time to get to the precinct for further tests.
I mean sure but not that much, afaik the tests at the scene (for BAC, not the subjective tests) are pretty solid as far as evidence goes. In this case it probably mattered even less, blowing a .25 equates to looking pretty fucking smashed for most people so the test is basically just checking a box lmao
No the roadside tests are bad. They’re not very accurate, which is why you should always refuse to give one roadside. Wait until you’re at the police station.
I would say you're mostly right. The margin of error is bigger than I thought it would be, after checking myself here. Also some states do equip their state patrol with vehicle-portable devices that are not the handheld. Depending on where someone is, they might not get a choice to take it at the station instead (that seems to vary quite a bit by jurisdiction just at a cursory glance). But ultimately I support the philosophy of giving cops as little ammunition as possible. Just make sure you can actually do it.
I've read that those portable tests on the scene aren't super accurate. Another commentor said they aren't generally acceptable as proof of DUI in the courts either. None of this is solid fact from research though.