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.
Every cop on the the side of the road reading arbitrary numbers off electronic gadgets they don’t understand - or now, holding down citizens and bleeding them onto new gadgets they also don’t understand - is a cop who isn’t out actually driving and finding bad drivers.
The highways would be a safer place if the breathalyzer hadn’t been invented. They’d be even safer if the radar gun hadn’t been invented either. You can’t quantify dangerous driving.
Ah...The drunk might be in compliance, but the person carrying the drunk must have proper, approved training for carrying drunks, and must be certified.
I don’t think it is cops finding a way to rig the system. It is MADD finding a way to rig the system so they can scare people and raise more money.
Thanks, that got a good laugh from everyone here.
I needed that.
The AdMod didn’t. Perhaps I shouldn’t have called him smelly...
I’d make this real simple...either accept the blood test...or we take your car...here and now (we call the wrecker and have it towed within 30 minutes).
You want the car back? Fine....pay a simple $4,000 fee and we let you have the car back. Car valued at less than $4,000...fine...just your lucky day.
I’ll bet after about 300 of these confiscated cars...folks start to think twice about drinking heavily outside of the house. We may lose greatly on alcohol tax revenues but we would probably trim DWI’s and deaths by 90 percent in one year.
The best deal of this....those guys who used to get arrested twice or three times a year....are going to be broke and unable to afford much socializing anyway.
“I don’t think it is cops finding a way to rig the system. It is MADD finding a way to rig the system so they can scare people and raise more money.”
Mark Twain said that nothing needs reforming as much as other people’s habits. There is s certain kind of person of whom this is true, and when they are in charge, look out.
those cites indicate a refusal has a specific consequence, not a refusal allows for a forced insertion of a needle in the body.
refusal equals administrative suspension.
however “a specimin” language leaves void for vaugness issues.
—”But.. that is NOT the purpose of most DUI laws today. They are aimed at complete prohibition and/or revenue generation.”—
I honestly don’t believe they want to end drinking. They just want the allowable amount to be so minuscule, anyone is suspect. DUIs are HUGE money makers.
“In 86 Arizona Territory, they dropped the legal to .15 , there was a knashing of teeth then.”
There you go.
I propose a new slogan for MADD and the rest:
“Passing .08 on the way to .00”
OK. I would get that from the DODT (Dept. of Drunk Transportation)?
I always thought 'DUI' stood for Democratic Underground Idiots...meaning something like dead voters in Chicago for Baracaca Osama.
—”And every time somebody is killed by a drunk they get more ammo.”—
Ah, but death need only be “alcohol related”.
That's correct. the TX statutes only allow for a forced draw in the event the driver was involved in an accident resulting in death. So, I find the the initial story screwy, or it means the particular chiefs are acting on their own, w/o legal justification.
"however “a specimin” language leaves void for vaugness issues."Nah, the definitions in the statutes and the total of the statutes makes everything clear.
was tried, was tossed out of court.
illegal taking when the car was borrowed or in another’s name or in joint names.
(s)how about public stoning? we could stone the accused and if they live after 20 minutes they are innocent. THAT would scare the poop out of people! we could even put it on PBS! after all its for the children...(/s)
Somewhat out of line here, but ya know what’s funny? You go down the superslab and as your cruising along, ya see these football field sized billboards pushing Wild Turkey and Jack Daniels. You go into these areas where no one is here legally, and there are all these billboards along the road pushing Tequila by the gallon.
Well, I live in Harris County, so this directly affects me.
First, I take public transport almost everywhere. Second, my home is within walking distance of my favorite watering hole. I *never* drive there.
BUT
I can never keep up with what the legal limit is this month. .05? I don’t even know how to relate that to number of drinks, but it sounds like a glass of wine.
I’ve had to call 911 four times in the last 8 months. The first time I called someone drove into our neighbors pick-up. The driver’s pick-up was wedged underneath and he was prying it out with a tire iron. It took the police 40 minutes to show, and only *after* they called us back asking for directions. The guys front end was destroyed and when he drove away you could see a thick black trail on the road. The police said, “Well, he’s gone now. I guess that’s that.” My wife pointed out that they could follow the big black tire marks.
I call 911 on drunks whenever I see them. The police don’t seem to care. I’m afraid they’ll use this power to intimidate whomever they choose and let the drunks free range.
based on what you are saying it seems we are subjects of journalistic malpractice in the reporting of this.
(still would have fun with the “a specimin” in a motion to surpress...then again it depends on the type of “a specimin” and the beauty of the female officer provided...)
“I propose, MANDATORY 5 year jail terms for anyone convicted of FIRST offense, BAC over 0.12%.”
Sorry, that’s just insane. Why? Because as soon as they pass that law, MADD and others will push the limit down to 0.08. Then 0.06. Then 0.04. Then 0.01 (don’t take any cough syurp). Think I’m kidding? The push is on already to do this with existing laws...
It isn’t sheriffs or police chiefs doing this on their own. Individual counties are changing the law within their counties to say you can’t refuse a blood test.
I don’t know how it will stand up in a state court. I’m not familiar enough with the relevant portions of the state constitution to say that they can’t do it at the county or city level. I would hope they can’t.
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.