Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Texas Police Will Take Blood By Force in DUI Cases
Ft. Worth Star Telegram via TheNewspaper.com ^ | 9/14/05 | Ft. Worth Star Telegram Staff

Posted on 09/14/2005 3:42:43 PM PDT by elkfersupper

Dalworthington Gardens, Texas police will draw the blood of drunk driving suspects.

After completing a training course, Dalworthington Gardens police officers have been certified to draw blood from any motorist whom they suspect of driving under the influence of alcohol. The small North Texas city joins three counties -- Montague, Archer and Clay -- which have recently adopted similar policies.

These jurisdictions are seeking to make drunk driving convictions less vulnerable to court challenge as mounting evidence shows breathalyzer machines can be inaccurate. Under the new policy, a suspect will be brought to a police station and asked in a videotaped interrogation to submit voluntarily to a blood test. If the request is refused, police will call one of the judges who have agreed to remain on-call to obtain a warrant. If approved, police will draw the blood, by force if necessary. Anyone who refuses a blood test, even if not convicted or formally accused of a crime, will surrender his license to drive on the spot and will not see it again for at least six months.

"It's kind of eerie," Frank Colosi, an attorney who works with the Fort Worth chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union told the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram. "It's kind of grotesque that the government can come and take your blood."

Section 724.017 of the Texas code requires that, "Only a physician, qualified technician, chemist, registered professional nurse, or licensed vocational nurse may take a blood specimen at the request or order of a peace officer....'qualified technician' does not include emergency medical services personnel." Dalworthington Gardens believes their twenty-hour course meets this standard.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: alcohol; billofrights; constitutionlist; donutwatch; dui; dumbideas; dwi; fascism; govwatch; jackbootedthugs; leo; madd; scotus; vampires; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-237 next last
MADD strikes again, and the witch hunt continues.

Why don't we just ban booze altogether and get this crap over with?

Oh, I forgot. We already tried that.

1 posted on 09/14/2005 3:42:49 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: freepatriot32

One for your ping list.


2 posted on 09/14/2005 3:45:00 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper
Just out of sick curiousity, how do you draw blood "by force"? Strap the guy down? Gas him? Hog tie him and sit on his head?
And what happens if, after all that, he turns out not to have any alcohol in his bloodstream?
3 posted on 09/14/2005 3:45:44 PM PDT by LongElegantLegs ("Nuthin' ain't worth nuthin', but it's free.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

oh yeah, and your dna on file too, even if the test shows you had nothing stronger than a 7up.


4 posted on 09/14/2005 3:47:24 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (No wonder the Southern Baptist Church threw Greer out: Only one god per church! [Ann Coulter])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper
any motorist who they suspect

Oh my, this could get nasty, who's idea is this again???? LOL, I wanna see them take blood by force, lol, this should be good, real good!

5 posted on 09/14/2005 3:49:46 PM PDT by rockabyebaby (I'm not afraid to say out loud what the rest of you are afraid to admit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

Whoah, this is a disturbing developement.


6 posted on 09/14/2005 3:49:56 PM PDT by SoDak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper
Unreasonable search and seizure, and a presumption of guilt. The precedent will be used in other types of cases and extended quite imaginatively, as such things always are. Extended into areas of behavior that are not quite so easily vilified.
7 posted on 09/14/2005 3:50:26 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry (Esse Quam Videre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper
Oh! just screened up Akyroyd's Nothing But Trouble

heh
8 posted on 09/14/2005 3:50:37 PM PDT by Republicus2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LongElegantLegs

I thought the blood test could be required only after a traffic accident.


9 posted on 09/14/2005 3:51:04 PM PDT by MeanWestTexan (A good friend helps you move. A great friend helps you move a body.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: LongElegantLegs
Just out of sick curiousity, how do you draw blood "by force"? Strap the guy down? Gas him? Hog tie him and sit on his head? And what happens if, after all that, he turns out not to have any alcohol in his bloodstream?

I can just see that now. Maybe they didn't think of that aspect.

I think it would be more legitimate if someone refused, to just suspend their license, rather than wrestling them to the floor and removing their blood by force. That's a bit much in my opinon.

10 posted on 09/14/2005 3:51:04 PM PDT by Black Tooth (The more people I meet, the more I like my dog.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

Something tells me this will not survive a serious court challenge.


11 posted on 09/14/2005 3:51:16 PM PDT by NoControllingLegalAuthority
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

Aklroyd's judge had a bone-skinning machine for scofflaws! Harsh


12 posted on 09/14/2005 3:52:14 PM PDT by Republicus2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper
This has long been standard practice for military personnel operating their vehicles on military bases....of course, when you're on active duty, the government essentially owns you and your constitutional rights are modified subject to the needs of the military.

Having said that, I think it's entirely inappropriate for the civilian world short of cases where the subject is dead or incapacitated beyond acknowledging the source of their intoxication.

13 posted on 09/14/2005 3:52:17 PM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan

Well, from this article, it appears that you only have to be suspected of drunk driving.


14 posted on 09/14/2005 3:53:46 PM PDT by LongElegantLegs ("Nuthin' ain't worth nuthin', but it's free.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: LongElegantLegs
how do you draw blood "by force"?

All of your suggestions will probably be attempted. Plus there are already news stories out there about people being "Tasered" into submission.

And what happens if, after all that, he turns out not to have any alcohol in his bloodstream?

Odds are he will still be charged with DWI. Happens all the time. All the LEO has to do is say he thought that the accused was "impaired".

15 posted on 09/14/2005 3:55:05 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry
Unreasonable search and seizure, and a presumption of guilt.

Pretty much standard for DWI and certain "Domestic Violence" allegations since about 1993.

16 posted on 09/14/2005 3:56:37 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper
Oh, I forgot. We already tried that.

That was a long time ago. Tobacco doesn't impair drivers, and it's under massive assault. Why the determination not to do anything about a cancer on society that causes the death of untold thousands of guilty and innocent alike, the destroyed lives, the innocent children... Why not ban booze?

17 posted on 09/14/2005 3:56:53 PM PDT by johnb838 (I got nuthin to say,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

Attention Police Officers: I carry a handgun in my vehicle.


18 posted on 09/14/2005 3:57:23 PM PDT by Normal4me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Black Tooth

You already lose your license in Texas if you refuse a sobriety test.


19 posted on 09/14/2005 3:58:18 PM PDT by johnb838 (I got nuthin to say,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

They can have my blood over my cold, dead...um...nevermind. :(


20 posted on 09/14/2005 3:58:37 PM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin (Save The Earth. It's The Only Planet With Chocolate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LongElegantLegs
The average driver knows if they have been drinking or not. The police also have a pretty good idea if the driver has been drinking.

In our state driving is a privilege. The cop asks you to take the test, you say no, your license is taken on the spot and you still have to go to court and fight the charge.
21 posted on 09/14/2005 3:59:09 PM PDT by PeteB570
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Black Tooth

Maybe they just beat the snot out of you and then pipette some up.


22 posted on 09/14/2005 3:59:15 PM PDT by johnb838 (I got nuthin to say,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

So ...food and water are a "medical treatment"...but drawing Blood isnt a medical proceedure??


23 posted on 09/14/2005 3:59:41 PM PDT by Crim (I may be a Mr "know it all"....but I'm also a Mr "forgot most of it"...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

I have no problem with the cops taking blood. You forget that the people that this will be used against are breaking the law, forget that if they are innocent the blood test will show that too. DUI is not a victimless crime, it is indeed a very violent crime........what you say no one was hurt? Think about it this way....If someone shoots thru the windows of a school with kids inside, is it any less violent because no one was hit.

Drunk drivers nnow that what they are doing is wrong but decide to take the chance that they wont hurt someone. Just like the woman who took my leg did......she lost.

Stop wringing your hands about the rights of criminals, If you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to worry about,or have you gambled in the past and feel a little guilty or simpathetic.....don't just live right and you will have nothing to worry about.

PS MADD doesnt want you not to have fun! We just want you to call a cab or designate a driver so nobody gets hurt because of a BAD decision

I didn't deserve the decision that a drunk driver made!

My family dodn't deserve the decision that a drunk driver made!

And the young lady deserved a better decision than she made the day she took my leg and ultimately ended up in prison.


24 posted on 09/14/2005 3:59:47 PM PDT by MrStumpy (Its awful embarrassing to get your butt kicked by a one legged man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoControllingLegalAuthority

I've drawn many chain of custody blood alcohols. I absolutely refuse to draw against a persons will. In fact, I always specifically ask if they are complying of their own free will and understand the implications of their consent.(They are waiving their 4th amendment rights.)

Makes for a much stronger case if you advise people of their rights and make sure they clearly understand their consent.

Of course, most are too drunk to really give "informed" consent. They haven't a clue to the fact they they are handing over incriminating evidence.


25 posted on 09/14/2005 3:59:50 PM PDT by tryingtomakesenseofthis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan
I thought the blood test could be required only after a traffic accident.

Blood, breath, or urine is required upon "suspicion".

Otherwise, automatic license suspension for up to a year on the first offense. That way in most States, now.

26 posted on 09/14/2005 3:59:51 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: LongElegantLegs

What's the big deal? In most states, if you refuse a sobriety test, you are convicted of DUI anyway.

If you take the test, at least you can prove that you may be a lousy driver, but you're not under the influence of anything other than your own carelessness.


27 posted on 09/14/2005 4:00:10 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Normal4me

Tell a cop that and you'll be eatin' some pavimento, my friend.


28 posted on 09/14/2005 4:00:22 PM PDT by johnb838 (I got nuthin to say,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

Vampires.


29 posted on 09/14/2005 4:00:29 PM PDT by HaveGunWillTravel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper
Hello,

And this is in TEXAS? Perhaps the state that most pushes for individuality? Good Lord.

Glad to be here, not really recognizing my county right now, MOgirl
30 posted on 09/14/2005 4:01:34 PM PDT by MOgirl (In memory of Walton Wayne Callahan, I love you forever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrStumpy
If you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to worry about

Sorry about your leg but that position is never going to fly very far in a free country. Which ours isn't but we still like to pretend there's a fourth amendment.

31 posted on 09/14/2005 4:02:56 PM PDT by johnb838 (I got nuthin to say,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: johnb838
Maybe they just beat the snot out of you and then pipette some up.

That may work for Texans, but not me.

32 posted on 09/14/2005 4:03:02 PM PDT by Black Tooth (The more people I meet, the more I like my dog.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

It's still better than the breathalyzer. A blood test is actually accurate, as opposed to the breathalyzer which can be wildly off (spritz some breath freshener in your mouth and blow into one when sober - watch the reading.)


33 posted on 09/14/2005 4:03:09 PM PDT by Spktyr (Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

Boy, I don't think that this will pass the constitutional test. Pretty far out if you ask me.


34 posted on 09/14/2005 4:03:31 PM PDT by timydnuc (I'll die on my feet before I'll live on my knees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: johnb838
Why not ban booze hamburgers?

There, all fixed.

35 posted on 09/14/2005 4:03:35 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

I do not understand how these nutters can have so much power. They are truly mad, in my opinion.


36 posted on 09/14/2005 4:04:34 PM PDT by publana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: livius

HEre in TX, the loss of the license is not connected to whether or not you are guilty of the crime -- it is simply an administrative rule. Refuse and lose. The crime is treated separately.


37 posted on 09/14/2005 4:04:42 PM PDT by johnb838 (I got nuthin to say,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: HaveGunWillTravel

The ACLU is MADD. They won't do a thing.


38 posted on 09/14/2005 4:04:55 PM PDT by AGreatPer (Where I live Roe V Wade is a decision to be made on how to cross the Susquehanna River.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: PeteB570
In our state driving is a privilege.

In a free society, it is a fundamental right to peaceably travel between Point A and Point B in or on any contemporary conveyance, without being interfered with or detained by government agents.

39 posted on 09/14/2005 4:06:09 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: AGreatPer
The ACLU is MADD.

DAMM, (Drunks against mad mothers) isn't real happy either.

40 posted on 09/14/2005 4:08:18 PM PDT by Black Tooth (The more people I meet, the more I like my dog.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: LongElegantLegs
This whole "drawing blood" thing is going to get very interesting.

First of all I am for keeping impaired drivers off the road. Can you imagine the spectrum of personalities - usually impaired - and their range of reactions to the officer and his blood drawing tools?

basic impaired behavior, fear of needles, fear of jail, fear of catching blood-borne disease (that applies to the officer also)- etc.

41 posted on 09/14/2005 4:08:55 PM PDT by winston2 (Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness! :-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MrStumpy
I'm sorry about your loss and injuries.

Would you feel any better or be any better off if the person who injured you had not been drinking?

If not, why not?

MADD is a vengeful lot, and you just pointed that out.

42 posted on 09/14/2005 4:09:46 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: MrStumpy

"I have no problem with the cops taking blood"



I have a real problem with this as it is against the 5th amendment. No one is recquired to give evidence against themselves, no matter if it's murder or petty theft. This shouldn't stand a court challenge.


43 posted on 09/14/2005 4:10:08 PM PDT by Figment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: johnb838

Exactly. So if you have the blood test, at least you have a chance (assuming you're not drunk or stoned, that is - in which case, you deserved it).


44 posted on 09/14/2005 4:11:27 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

..."It's kind of grotesque that the government can come and take your blood."...

They've taken your homes your rights and your guns, what's left but blood?


45 posted on 09/14/2005 4:12:54 PM PDT by the gillman@blacklagoon.com (North American Community. What's yours is theirs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

No, I just looked up the Texas Transportation Code; it's online. (Chapter 700)

You can refuse breath or blood test, except in the case of an accident. You do get a mandatory suspension for 180 days, but you can refuse.

The statute also states who can draw blood --- and if an EMT can't do it, a cop sure can't do it.

This is flat-out illegal.


46 posted on 09/14/2005 4:13:28 PM PDT by MeanWestTexan (A good friend helps you move. A great friend helps you move a body.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: johnb838

for 180 days.


47 posted on 09/14/2005 4:13:50 PM PDT by MeanWestTexan (A good friend helps you move. A great friend helps you move a body.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: NoControllingLegalAuthority

Something tells me that people may not survive this procedure.


48 posted on 09/14/2005 4:14:13 PM PDT by the gillman@blacklagoon.com (North American Community. What's yours is theirs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: LongElegantLegs

I looked this up; I am correct re: only post-accident can it be forced.


49 posted on 09/14/2005 4:14:40 PM PDT by MeanWestTexan (A good friend helps you move. A great friend helps you move a body.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Spktyr
A blood test is actually accurate

Providing, of course, it is your blood they are testing.

"How do I know the blood they tested was mine?"

50 posted on 09/14/2005 4:15:04 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-237 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson