No, the field sobriety test is conducted under suspicion, a refusal bringing punishment. Psychological and physical testing at time of license procurement, with waiver available so that the licensed citizen may drink, smoke, and drive all at the same time without fear of punishment for mere potential harm. Hurt or harm neighbor or property while under the influence, and punishment will ensue swiftly and fairly.
Except when one has a bona fide disability that precludes the results of a FST from being useful. FST assumes that one not under an inhibiting influence could otherwise pass.
Many folks cannot due to orthopedic or other disabling injuries.
Been there. Beat that. Now carry a letter from the VA documenting my athletic ability or lack thereof.
I will not acquiesce to self- incrimination.
You do realize that almost everyone over60 cannot pass a classical roadside FST?
Whether or not a field sobriety test is conducted under suspicion is irrelevant. It’s still, pretty much by definition, an assessment of an individual’s ability to handle an altered state of awareness, no?
When I was young, I never needed any form of government licensing to drink, smoke, and drive all at the same time, anyway. Glad I lived through it, and never harmed anyone else either.
In any case, I don’t think your idea of government testing and licensing to allow impaired driving is all that good. What forms of testing would permit what degree of what type of impairment? What about other factors at a given time, that weren’t considered in the testing, such as illness, distraction, emotional distress? Those can impair one’s driving also.
# No, the field sobriety test is conducted under suspicion, a refusal bringing punishment.
In direct violation of the 5th amendment. Not that anyone cares about such things any more.