Posted on 12/28/2007 7:07:11 PM PST by elkfersupper
More Texas jurisdictions are turning to forced blood draws to convict those suspected of DUI.
Jurisdictions within Texas are expanding programs where police use force to draw blood from motorists accused of driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI). Last week, El Paso announced it had joined Harris and Wilson Counties in a "no refusal" program specifically designed to streamline the blood drawing process.
It works as follows. An accused motorist is arrested and taken downtown. While being videotaped, he will be asked to submit to a breathalyzer test with officers specifically avoiding any mention that blood will be taken by force if the often inaccurate breathalyzer test is refused.
During key holiday weekends, a pre-assigned judge who agreed to wait by the phone will approve search warrants created from pre-written templates -- often within just thirty minutes. With warrant in hand, a nurse whose salary is often paid by Mothers Against Drunk Drivers (MADD) will draw blood while police officers exert the required level of force. In some cases, this use of force can cause permanent damage. Montague, Archer and Clay counties have similar programs except that these departments do away with the nurse and have police officers perform the blood draw themselves, despite a state law banning the practice (view law).
Two of the twelve motorists subjected to the first blood draws in Harris County on Memorial Day weekend this year were later found to have blood alcohol levels below the .08 limit. The program will return on New Year's Eve.
"For the Children!?
How many other tests would save lives?
Far too soon they'll be doing blood draws as part of a traffic stop.
Drivers license
Registration
Proof of Insurance
Sample of blood.
Not sarcasm!
Just avoid Texas.
How about we set penalties for DUMB driving more appropriately?
A 50 yr old man with no accidents on his record is safer after an entire 6 pack than a 16 yr old boy, stone sober on a cell phone with three buddies in the car.
I’m for any law that keeps drunks and other type dope heads off the streets.
[Criminal attorneys are reporting FEWER DUI/DWI cases hurting their bottom line. (no crime no client)]
I agree. My former firm (I did crim. def. for 8 years, mainly DUI) tells me the DUI rate is down but still thriving as a business. The sleasy areas of town report far fewer night time drinkers in the bars. Of course, dom. viol. is up.
In AZ a (first offense) DUI will cost you over $9000 according to some of my old friends. Second offenses are MUCH higher if you factor in lost wages due to being in the Gray Bar Hotel for a long period.
[Alcohol on the scene also gets included regardless of BAC.
(Grandpa going home with liquor in the trunk wins him a spot on the list)]
I don’t believe that is the case in AZ. But otherwise even a drunk passenger in the non-causitive car gets into the database.
Next..... Texas needs to join most other normal states and pass checkpoint sobriety laws.
Take all the guns too...that can only save lives also.....
Yes, let's have checkpoints at all county lines...Full searches, pat downs, search dogs...the whole tamale.
Minnesota: make illegal to refuse the breat test. The refusal will result in greater sanctions than taking the test and failing it. Loss of license is longer for refusal than for DUI.
No forced blood draws unless driver not capable of responding due to accident, etc., then done by trained and licensed lab techs.
Much better system...
It is .1% which equates to .001
And I still don't buy it.
As with far too many other things, like shooting people. Murder is against the law, enforce THAT law and you don't have to ban guns or add "hate" crimes to the long and never ending list of new ones.
LOL. That’s the nicest thing said to me on this thread yet.
Thank you.
No... I don't think you're kidding, I agree with you. And, I think THAT is insane. I want to push the other way... let's RAISE the legal drinking limit, but... increase the penalty for drunk driving.
I want less ambiguity about what is "drunk"... but, also want to end the coddling of people who are putting all of us at risk by driving when they shouldn't.
Not much... but, EITHER one is clearly drunk enough that they should NOT be driving.
Ok... I was being a little 'absurd' to make a point... directionally... I want to RAISE the legal drinking limit, but increase to penalties for driving while really drunk. And, DRAMATICALLY increase the penalty for repeat offenders.
What we need is.. a better way to determine who is really "too drunk to drive". The Breathalyzer is a joke... a very BAD joke.
You see the natural reaction here to mandatory blood tests.
I'm suggesting, we remove the ambiguity about whether or not someone is "drunk"... enough to where, a simple videotape of field sobriety tests would be enough to convict someone. If we move away from the "line of innocence" but, increase the penalty. Then, reasonable people will change their own behavior to reflect the risk to them.
These days... we'd probably give them an application for a University scholarship!
NO WAY! The Breathalyzer is wholly innacurate... especially when maintained by police forces who just don't care to keep it accurate.... because they don't have to.
I have personally blown a 0.11% on a Breathalyzer, when.. by any kind of calculation, I should have been close to zero. Analysis of police records proved, the machine had not been calibrated in weeks... a man two people before me blew a 0.57%...a man who was still walking, and talking (albeit in slurred fashion)
BTW>> I requested a blood test (as the sign on the wall in the holding room told me I had a right to)... for that, I was hit so hard with the butt of a pistol, I was knocked off my stool and later needed 3 stitches...
After 6 months, all my vacation, and about $2000 in lawyer fees, I won a NOT GUILTY verdict after about 1 minute of jury deliberations. Sorry... but, I do not have faith in our legal system to trust ultimate use of the "Breathalyzer" to enforce these laws.
Jumpin’ Jehovah’s Witness!
—”They said they didn’t have a position on judges with DUI’s. What?? I’m just baffled.”—
Ask them what their position is with their FOUNDER’S DUI!!!
—”Nevertheless, those drivers lost their DLs for 6 months, or longer.”—
Which is a given. Why add to problems by supplying the enemy with evidence.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.