Yes. Police can breath test cyclists. RBT is exempt. No different than public intoxication. And yes if you get breath tested while on a bicycle and fail you will be treated the same if you were behind the wheel of a car. Its the only cycling offence that carries demerit points. Speeding only results in fines.RonK wrote:Sure, anyone can refuse - but refusing a breathe test is also an offence in Queensland.human909 wrote:And the cyclist is within their rights to refuse.RonK wrote:But if they are investigating another offence (not wearing a helmet) they can most certainly request a breathe test if they suspect the cyclist is intoxicated.
Queensland Police (Illegally?) Breath Testing Cyclist
- Lukeyboy
- Posts: 3621
- Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 2:38 am
Re: Queensland Police (Illegally?) Breath Testing Cyclist
Postby Lukeyboy » Fri Nov 30, 2018 8:34 pm
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Queensland Police (Illegally?) Breath Testing Cyclist
Postby human909 » Fri Nov 30, 2018 11:50 pm
Lukeboy. Why do you feel the need to make stuff up? Go read the relevant legislation to your state.Lukeyboy wrote:Yes. Police can breath test cyclists. RBT is exempt. No different than public intoxication. And yes if you get breath tested while on a bicycle and fail you will be treated the same if you were behind the wheel of a car. Its the only cycling offence that carries demerit points. Speeding only results in fines.
-
- Posts: 205
- Joined: Fri May 22, 2015 1:13 pm
Re: Queensland Police (Illegally?) Breath Testing Cyclist
Postby Usernoname » Sat Dec 01, 2018 12:46 pm
(7) Offence of driving etc. animals and other things while under the influence
Any person who, while under the influence of liquor or a drug, drives or is in charge of any horse or other animal on a road, or drives or is in charge of any vehicle (other than a motor vehicle) on a road, or attempts to put in motion any vehicle (other than a motor vehicle) on a road, is guilty of an offence.
Maximum penalty—40 penalty units or 9 months
imprisonment.
-
- Posts: 1193
- Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 9:16 pm
- Location: Perth, WA
Re: Queensland Police (Illegally?) Breath Testing Cyclist
Postby NASHIE » Sat Dec 01, 2018 1:56 pm
I reckon some of our ancestors ended up on the boat guilty as charged.Usernoname wrote:79 Vehicle offences involving liquor or other drugs
(7) Offence of driving etc. animals and other things while under the influence
Any person who, while under the influence of liquor or a drug, drives or is in charge of any horse or other animal on a road, or drives or is in charge of any vehicle (other than a motor vehicle) on a road, or attempts to put in motion any vehicle (other than a motor vehicle) on a road, is guilty of an offence.
Maximum penalty—40 penalty units or 9 months
imprisonment.
-
- Posts: 3459
- Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am
Re: Queensland Police (Illegally?) Breath Testing Cyclist
Postby CKinnard » Sat Dec 01, 2018 2:28 pm
"Insp Keith McDonald said police did not have the power to breathalyse cyclists but could arrest riders they suspected of being drunk.
"Once they have been arrested we can ask them to consent to having a breath test done," he said.
Anyone arrested for riding drunk cannot lose their driver's licence in Queensland. "
Keep in mind if you refuse to consent to a breath test, when you go before a judge, you may be subject to a higher fine.
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Queensland Police (Illegally?) Breath Testing Cyclist
Postby human909 » Sat Dec 01, 2018 3:02 pm
- Lukeyboy
- Posts: 3621
- Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 2:38 am
Re: Queensland Police (Illegally?) Breath Testing Cyclist
Postby Lukeyboy » Sat Dec 01, 2018 7:56 pm
(7) Offence of driving etc. animals and other things while
under the influence
Any person who, while under the influence of liquor or a
drug, drives or is in charge of any horse or other animal on a
road, or drives or is in charge of any vehicle (other than a
motor vehicle) on a road, or attempts to put in motion any
vehicle (other than a motor vehicle) on a road, is guilty of an
offence.
Maximum penalty—40 penalty units or 9 months
imprisonment.
From the QPS Operation Policy.
No authority exists to require a specimen of breath for a breath test when investigating an offence against s. 79(7):
‘Vehicle offences involving liquor or other drugs’ of the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act, i.e. being in
charge of a horse or bicycle etc. whilst under the influence of liquor or drugs. An officer may however require a specimen
of breath for analysis or blood for a laboratory test once a subject person has been arrested for such offence.
The part about losing your license must have changed as a few railway guys up here in Queensland have lost their drivers license for drink driving only to be caught and had a longer suspension imposed for riding drunk after leaving the same pub.
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Queensland Police (Illegally?) Breath Testing Cyclist
Postby human909 » Sun Dec 02, 2018 2:04 am
To the best of my knowledge it hasn't changed, but I'm happy to be proven incorrect.Lukeyboy wrote:The part about losing your license must have changed as a few railway guys up here in Queensland have lost their drivers license for drink driving only to be caught and had a longer suspension imposed for riding drunk after leaving the same pub.
That said your anecdote may well be correct it wouldn't be the first time that cyclists have been falsely charged under the wrong sections of legislation. And if it isn't fought then the charges can end up sticking.
(I've also heard similar anecdotes for Victoria but never seen the actual evidence. And as discussed the laws for Victoria has a much bigger gap than QLD.)
- Lukeyboy
- Posts: 3621
- Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 2:38 am
Re: Queensland Police (Illegally?) Breath Testing Cyclist
Postby Lukeyboy » Sun Dec 02, 2018 2:29 pm
There's no legal requirement (unless arrested prior) but if the person consents then there's nothing preventing them from being charged citing the breathe test that they gave voluntary.human909 wrote:Yep. The very 2nd post in thread. And the are distinctly differences between that and the requirements for motor vehicles.
To the best of my knowledge it hasn't changed, but I'm happy to be proven incorrect.Lukeyboy wrote:The part about losing your license must have changed as a few railway guys up here in Queensland have lost their drivers license for drink driving only to be caught and had a longer suspension imposed for riding drunk after leaving the same pub.
That said your anecdote may well be correct it wouldn't be the first time that cyclists have been falsely charged under the wrong sections of legislation. And if it isn't fought then the charges can end up sticking.
(I've also heard similar anecdotes for Victoria but never seen the actual evidence. And as discussed the laws for Victoria has a much bigger gap than QLD.)
Also had a chat with a couple guys who work in this area. Seems there were numerous revisions and renumbering of the laws in Queensland when the 95 rules replaced the 1945 legislation and since then there have been a number of changes and reprints which potentially could have changed what would have happened in 1995 vs now. For example S79(1) is now referenced for license disqualification in drink driving cases where as if S79 or S79(7) was referenced that would then include cyclists and horse riders. Also prior convictions could play a part as there could be restrictions imposed by the court for that offence which would be a case by case (basically suspended offences or restricted licenses for disqualified drivers and their conditions imposed on them by the court) - legally it might not be much on its own but its enough to trigger the suspended part of the prior conviction or voids the restricted license.
An anecdote that is very correct. I can't remember the particulars of these blokes but I can see them losing their drivers license for drink driving. Getting a restricted license for a disqualified driver (you need a drivers license to operate machinery and operate vehicles even while on private property) and then getting caught drunk on a bicycle which would void their restricted license.
- Comedian
- Posts: 9166
- Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:35 pm
- Location: Brisbane
Re: Queensland Police (Illegally?) Breath Testing Cyclist
Postby Comedian » Mon Dec 03, 2018 2:44 pm
Reading all this I'm confused.. can you loose your drivers licence for drunk riding?Lukeyboy wrote:There's no legal requirement (unless arrested prior) but if the person consents then there's nothing preventing them from being charged citing the breathe test that they gave voluntary.human909 wrote:Yep. The very 2nd post in thread. And the are distinctly differences between that and the requirements for motor vehicles.
To the best of my knowledge it hasn't changed, but I'm happy to be proven incorrect.Lukeyboy wrote:The part about losing your license must have changed as a few railway guys up here in Queensland have lost their drivers license for drink driving only to be caught and had a longer suspension imposed for riding drunk after leaving the same pub.
That said your anecdote may well be correct it wouldn't be the first time that cyclists have been falsely charged under the wrong sections of legislation. And if it isn't fought then the charges can end up sticking.
(I've also heard similar anecdotes for Victoria but never seen the actual evidence. And as discussed the laws for Victoria has a much bigger gap than QLD.)
Also had a chat with a couple guys who work in this area. Seems there were numerous revisions and renumbering of the laws in Queensland when the 95 rules replaced the 1945 legislation and since then there have been a number of changes and reprints which potentially could have changed what would have happened in 1995 vs now. For example S79(1) is now referenced for license disqualification in drink driving cases where as if S79 or S79(7) was referenced that would then include cyclists and horse riders. Also prior convictions could play a part as there could be restrictions imposed by the court for that offence which would be a case by case (basically suspended offences or restricted licenses for disqualified drivers and their conditions imposed on them by the court) - legally it might not be much on its own but its enough to trigger the suspended part of the prior conviction or voids the restricted license.
An anecdote that is very correct. I can't remember the particulars of these blokes but I can see them losing their drivers license for drink driving. Getting a restricted license for a disqualified driver (you need a drivers license to operate machinery and operate vehicles even while on private property) and then getting caught drunk on a bicycle which would void their restricted license.
What is clear is that drunk riding is probably ok as long as you can still ride well and don't bring any undue attention to yourself. Of course.. I'm sure every drink driver ever has thought the same thing.
- Lukeyboy
- Posts: 3621
- Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 2:38 am
Re: Queensland Police (Illegally?) Breath Testing Cyclist
Postby Lukeyboy » Mon Dec 03, 2018 3:42 pm
If person 2 doesn’t have a restricted lisence/suspended lisence they are immune from losing their driving lisence if they were drunk on a bike as the wording for lisence suspension for drink driving only applies to S79(1) which is motor vehicles. They still have to pay the fine but there is no driving suspension all because the legislation has (1) written down.
If the wording for lisence suspension changed from 79(1) to 79(7) - cyclists/horses - or just 79 that would include everyone.
- mikesbytes
- Super Mod
- Posts: 22159
- Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
- Location: Tempe, Sydney
- Contact:
Re: Queensland Police (Illegally?) Breath Testing Cyclist
Postby mikesbytes » Mon Dec 03, 2018 5:27 pm
1. Risk to yourself
2. Risk to others
Personally I'm seeing that point 2 is a lot more important than point 1 (but of course its debatable).
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Queensland Police (Illegally?) Breath Testing Cyclist
Postby human909 » Mon Dec 03, 2018 7:22 pm
Exactly. In a free society laws and regulations should largely be made regarding point 2. and laws regarding point 1. should be made only with VERY careful consideration and sensible rationales. Somehow Australia has half-forgotten that bit.mikesbytes wrote:The arguments could be centered around to concepts;
1. Risk to yourself
2. Risk to others
Personally I'm seeing that point 2 is a lot more important than point 1 (but of course its debatable).
I say half-forgotten because there are uncountable ways I can endanger myself or other around me that are perfectly legal and unregulated.
It makes little sense to regulate when a problem doesn't exist. And the problem of drink cycling, well it pretty much is non existent. (Even in the example given, there was no evidence that there was a problem or even a reasonable chance of an issue.)
-
- Posts: 6179
- Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
- Location: Mill Park
Re: Queensland Police (Illegally?) Breath Testing Cyclist
Postby fat and old » Mon Dec 03, 2018 7:23 pm
I agree absolutely there. If people want to get about drunk; driving, riding or walking; who cares what happens to them? They made their decision, live (or die) with it.mikesbytes wrote:The arguments could be centered around to concepts;
1. Risk to yourself
2. Risk to others
Personally I'm seeing that point 2 is a lot more important than point 1 (but of course its debatable).
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Queensland Police (Illegally?) Breath Testing Cyclist
Postby human909 » Mon Dec 03, 2018 7:31 pm
fat and old wrote:I agree absolutely there. If people want to get about drunk; driving, riding or walking; who cares what happens to them? They made their decision, live (or die) with it.
I'm not sure if that is sarcastic or not. But as we are all acutely aware plenty of people care. But also that is how our mostly world works, even despite our best nanning attempts. I don't have police checking up on my safe ladder use or how I use my chainsaw. I don't have police breath testing me 100m up a cliff face while rock-climbing.
Risk to yourself is still extremely good at self regulating (young males less so). Risk to others, not so much.
-
- Posts: 6179
- Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
- Location: Mill Park
Re: Queensland Police (Illegally?) Breath Testing Cyclist
Postby fat and old » Tue Dec 04, 2018 4:18 pm
Seasons Greetings btw
- ColinOldnCranky
- Posts: 6734
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:58 pm
Re: Queensland Police (Illegally?) Breath Testing Cyclist
Postby ColinOldnCranky » Fri Dec 07, 2018 5:38 am
Regardless, before RBT was legal in WA they could still require (not just request) a breath test with reason, such as the smell of breath, slurred speech etc. By carrying out random vehicle inspections not really aimed at vehicle inspections (which apparently were legal) the WA Police in effect did do RBT.
That would suggest that the Qld police action was legal even if RBT is not (as others have suggested).
Maybe the rider who is the subject of the article should ride a unicycle instead. I can ride home after a drink or three just as legally as I can walk. I can ride on smooth surfaces with enough alcohol in my system to know that I am impaired. However it is an offense (in WA) for me to ride on the road after dark, and I value my life anyway, so I keep to the paths after a few drinks.
-
- Posts: 1026
- Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 1:27 pm
Re: Queensland Police (Illegally?) Breath Testing Cyclist
Postby RetroPilot » Wed Jan 16, 2019 9:48 am
Anyway, since I assume the offence is punishable by monetary penalty only...what is really the difference Qld law vs other states here?
I assume that in no state is there a license cancellation/suspension liable.
I read decades ago that being drunk on bike was an offence even more decades ago compared to the decades ago of that conversation..like, going back well before WW2..back when like, when in rest of English-speaking world except maybe in USA there were still maybe more cyclists than motorists.
- ColinOldnCranky
- Posts: 6734
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:58 pm
Re: Queensland Police (Illegally?) Breath Testing Cyclist
Postby ColinOldnCranky » Wed Jan 16, 2019 10:51 am
These days when people wander around in piublic in Onesies, maybe not.Comedian wrote:
Riding down the road with a stuffed toy on your head I would believe would make the test for reasonable suspicion.
Return to “Cycling Safety and Advocacy”
- General Australian Cycling Topics
- Info / announcements
- Buying a bike / parts
- General Cycling Discussion
- The Bike Shed
- Cycling Health
- Cycling Safety and Advocacy
- Women's Cycling
- Bike & Gear Reviews
- Cycling Trade
- Stolen Bikes
- Bicycle FAQs
- Serious Biking
- Audax / Randonneuring
- Retro biking
- Commuting
- MTB
- Recumbents
- Fixed Gear/ Single Speed
- Track
- Electric Bicycles
- Cyclocross and Gravel Grinding
- Dragsters / Lowriders / Cruisers
- Children's Bikes
- Cargo Bikes and Utility Cycling
- Road Racing
- Road Biking
- Training
- Time Trial
- Triathlon
- International and National Tours and Events
- Cycle Touring
- Touring Australia
- Touring Overseas
- Touring Bikes and Equipment
- Australia
- Western Australia
- New South Wales
- Queensland
- South Australia
- Victoria
- ACT
- Tasmania
- Northern Territory
- Country & Regional
- The Market Place
- Member to Member Bike and Gear Sales
- Want to Buy, Group Buy, Swap
- My Bikes or Gear Elsewhere
- Cycling Brands
- Cannondale
- Garmin
- Giant
- Shimano
- Trek
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
- All times are UTC+11:00
- Top
- Delete cookies
About the Australian Cycling Forums
The Australian Cycling Forums is a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.
Bicycles Network Australia
Forum Information
Connect with BNA
This website uses affiliate links to retail platforms including ebay, amazon, proviz and ribble.