[ConservativeMind]

Let me stress what SamAdams said further. He said “he was absolutely not under the influence” at that time, so he should have had no problem with walking the line and such.

However, if he was under the influence, then he had something to fear about walking the line.

Get it?

[buccaneer81]

He said “he was absolutely not under the influence” at that time, so he should have had no problem with walking the line and such.

The founding fathers would have told you that the next boat to Europe would be a good place for you.

You're one of those "papers please" Nazis.

[eyedigress]

However, if he was under the influence, then he had something to fear about walking the line.


Get it?

Words not required.

[dilvish]

There’s a lot more to a field sobriety test than walking the line. And in some states (AZ where I live being on the list) the field test is basically unpassable even if you’ve never touched booze in your life. There’s a lot of gotchas in the test, like they tell you to touch your nose but they don’t tell you when to stop touching your nose, how you handle that is considered an “indicator”. If you have the option in your state it’s best to refuse the field test, drunk sober or teetotaler no good can come from taking that test.

[an amused spectator]

However, if he was under the influence, then he had something to fear about walking the line.

The government should fear its citizens, not the other way around. Get it? ;-)