Skip to comments.'No refusal' initiative to become more common in Harris County
Posted on 12/30/2010 12:49:32 PM PST by RikaStrom
click here to read article
Ping to another one.
Head’s up. I didn’t see this one anywhere.
It will be a good time if anything to pick up illegals and deport them.
Has Harris County fixed the problems in their corruption evidence labs yet?
Has Harris County fixed the problems in their corrupt evidence labs yet?
Here’s the Tampa thread link....
Vampires are very popular these days.
They are more likely to cut bait when they pull over someone they suspect may be in the country illegally.
Of course they are. This is a revenue enhancement venture, nothing more. Illegals aren’t even on their radar.
This is the 2nd or third year they have been doing this, it works.
New Years Eve is for rookies anyway. Stay home and there will not be a problem.
Except if you have gas (burp) from drinking some beer, it can boost your readings. And the machines must be calibrated. Even if you blow below 0.08, it does not prohibit them from charging you anyway. And now they want to be able to prosecute 0.05 and below with another charge. Procedural crimes over "impairment". But it all brings in more money for insurance companies, lawyers, politicians, and county fines.
This just isn’t a good idea. It is un-American...PERIOD.
They need to have lawyers on hand to represent people.
Illegals don’t have the thousands of dollars to fund the system and may provide false ID anyway.
Let’s hear three oinks for this latest “revenue enhancement” venture. They lost the red light camera money so they had to do something !
Of course, they’ll not do something useful, like catch illegals for deportation. Or lack of driver’s licenses. Or lack of insurance. Or the pitiful condition of the junkpile the illegal is piloting.
This is a good program.
This is not the same as the Tampa initiative. Tampa has “checkpoints” ... which sounds like a blanket stop-and-check with or without probable cause.
As I understand it, Harris County gets a “no refusal” warrant after a sobriety-test refusal on a probable-cause initiated traffic stop. They don’t do tests on every stop or at a checkpoint ... they do tests when probable cause exists.
If probable cause exists, and a warrant is issued, the Constitution is satisfied, and justice is served.
They’ve been doing this in my Indiana county for several years on ALL chemical test refusal cases. It has many down sides for the defendant:
1. You are still going to jail if you refuse
2. First you will go to the hospital where they will draw your blood
3. Your case will be filed and the Bureau of Motor Vehicles will immediately suspend your license for one year
4. The state still gets the evidence necessary to convict you, and might even find some other things in your blood, like drugs or controlled substances, that would not show up on a breath test
5. Because of the backlog at the Department of Toxicology, an agency run by the 3 Stooges, the State will continue the case for 8 months until they get the test results
6. You will get convicted of the Operating While Intoxicated charge, and then there is an additional license suspension (minimum 1st offense 90 days) which has to get tacked on top of the one year refusal suspension.
Good advice: Don’t refuse the test unless this is your 3rd OWI.
Best advice: Don’t drink and drive.
Sorry, I disagree with this entire approach.
This body is MINE - I am not property of any state, country or munciple district. I, and I alone will decide if someone is going to TAKE my body, and only with permission.
The way the law USED to read, was that if pulled over for Drunk driving, if the driver refused to cooperate - he forfeited his driving priviledge for a period of 1 year. This was more harsh than the Drunk Driving charge he was pulled over for. An automatic plea of guilt would be assumed - so you were legally better off by cooperating with a Blood Alcohol reading of your choice.
If the Police can stop me, arbitarily - and then take my blood - arbitrarily -then I am not a person; but property of a state or goverment.
Funny, they CANNOT do this to accused rapists to determine whether the rape victim has been exposed to AIDS or any other sexually transmitted disease.
For all practical purposes, an accused child molester or murderer has more constitutional rights than a defendant in a drunk driving case.
Of course, the accused child molester or murderer has a lot more to lose.
The State of Nevada has had this on the law books for over 15 years. Something called, implied consent.
So let's see. If I exercise my 4th and 5th amendment rights to not provide evidence against myself, then that becomes "probable cause." And based on that probable cause, the state can compel me to provide evidence against myself from within my body.
Justice served, circular fascist style!
Seems like with that kind of logic, anything you like can be dispensed with in the Bill of Rights!
I think we should drug test the mayor, city council, and staff for drugs. Hair samples to be cut this afternoon at 3:15pm.
They are making plenty of other unsound judgements and our lesbian mayor has a history of ignoring state law to do whatever she wanted to (pre-office) anyway.
It’s for the good of the chil’ren.
Just my personal opinion but as American Citizens we are supposed to have the right to travel about freely within our country. Being stopped at a roadblock for a breath test is BS. If the cops think you are a hazard to the road then they should pull you over. Have you ever seen a drunk driving? They are all over the place they stick out like a sore thumb.
Beyond the roadblock it is unconstitutional to force an American Citizen to a blood test. I don’t care what its in connection with. Under the Constitution we have the right to be “secure” in our persons. No judge can take that away from us.
I find it very unsettling to read postings from people who just say “well stay off the road” What is that supposed to mean? This is supposed to be the land of the free not Russia.
And apparently there is some new pilot program for first time offenders I've heard it's rather draconian and it costs the defendant a bloody fortune, but if you manage to get through the process they expunge the DWI.
This is pure revenue generator.
Put some security cameras on the holding cells too just to catch the “few” crooked cops who assault prisoners.
If we are going to get 300 security cameras on the street to be able to follow up on assault calls, there should be a few in the prisons too.
LOL, in Houston? That won't happen, but I totally agree with you, that is should!
This really is turning in to Nazi Germany.
Very. What a gaggle of people they are going to have at these stops. And I don't trust breathalizers. Too easy to muck with the calibration.
As usual, Mr. Crichton has the last dozen pages of his story referencing laws and cases currently on the books to support his assertions.
If the police can forcibly take my blood - what's next? My heart? Liver? Brain? Bones? Under what pretext? In this case - my blood is being forcibly taken, to testify against me in a court of law.
This is wrong, on so many levels it's scary.
Also drug test the Cops and all welfare recipients and all their kids and especially all Politicians.
That's IMPAIRED driving. This is criminalizing drinking. The new "standard" they are pushing for (down from present 0.08 and prior 0.15) is 0.03-0.05.
It's about getting "easier" convictions. More revenues. More wins on paper.
The founder of MADD left the organization she began in the 1980s when she saw the way it was heading. She lobbied against them on behalf of brewers and bars in the 1990s.
Utah wants breathalyzer ignitions on all cars, prior charges or not. Hey, we can all take the time to respond to a nagging ignition system wanting a "retest" while we've are driving, right? Rainy roads can wait.
If we are going to take these measures with drinking and driving, we'd better be at least as strict when it comes to cellphone/texting and driving. That causes accidents throughout the day, not just 10pm-6am.
Texas was already caught red handed doing studies of illegally collected blood samples from babies in hospital.
Me, I'm traveling about three miles.
And it ain't exactly Westheimer out here. ;-)
And don't think you can film the officers in your traffic stop...
How about reappraising the evaulation of Bill White's home? It went down $1million in evaluation while he was mayor and he claims he didn't even ask them to do it.
Wonder if he filed an amended tax return to get back his "overpayment" on the earlier evaluation?
Houston's Mayor, Anise Parker?
You could get a hair sample from between her teeth but it wouldn't be hers.
I never actually said that...
No. If you’re stopped and they have reason to think you’re drunk, they have probable cause, and they can ask you to take a sobriety test. If you refuse the test, they can show/explain probable cause to a judge to get a warrant.
The probable cause isn’t the refusal ... the probable cause is what leads to the question that led to the refusal.
Hair? That’s just carpet.
There's a reason we call them 'U-tards'.
Somehow, the whole idea of "Honey, come over here and blow in this tube, so I can go get some more beer" hasn't crossed what passes for a brain here.
The city cut loose Mayor Bill White’s minor daughter when she was busted after curfew, pulled over on probable cause, asked to submit to a drunk test, refused, and was bonded out all before 8am.
Again Bill White claimed he had no influence in this matter. The case was later dropped when the officer changed his statement. Did he lie in his initial report then?
Nothing but a sham either way.
While I have no problem with giving a drunk driver a nice fine - jail time, suspension of their license and even up to confiscation of their vehicle (multiple charges) - I have a problem with anyone taking ANY body part, fluid or DNA without permission.
We are individuals, with rights - not property of the state.
Catch us, try us, punish us...
If a person wants to refuse the test - that’s fine. Throw the book at them - maximum fine, automatic plea of guilt, ect.
But, under no condition should ANYONE be held down, and their personal body violated against their will.
We do not do this to convicted rapists - just to let the victim know whether she has been exposed to AIDS - yet a state can do this under the guise of collecting evidence?
Heads up Joe!!!!!!
Why bother with a judge rubber-stamping a warrant then? If the officer has reason to think you should pony up, then why bother with a judge?
I do not object to a warranted collection of evidence of intoxication when the crime at issue is directly related to the intoxication of the defendant. If we cannot collect evidence of the crime, we cannot prosecute ... and intoxicated driving needs to be a crime.
We are Constitutionally protected against warrantless searches, but States are free to legislate such searches based on warrants without running afoul of the Constitution. They are also free to make such searches illegal. Since the Constitution is silent on the issue of warranted searches, the issue is open for debate in Statehouses ... so lobby away.
You are absolutely correct. I phone in drunks whenever I see them.
People better wake up to the fact that just because we agree to a license or something else like TSA it should never mean we give our individual rights and due process.
These roadblocks are creepy and a really bad idea and it won’t stop at this.
We just have to take a hard look back at Wilson and Roosevelt and see some of the same things they were doing and it is going to begin to happen now...
This is just inviting trouble for everyone involved.
That is because you waived your rights when you signed your driver lic. They can do anything they want to you.
I just pointed that same thing out to my wife. I told her a warrant may only be issued upon presentation of evidence of a crime. What is the evidence, a use of your fifth amendment rights? Furthermore, except in felony DUI, all DUI first offences are misdomeanors. Seems this is using a sledge hammer to kill a fly.
Now then, if they can run check points for DUI, and have a judge handy to sign the warrant compelling evidence, why can they not do the same thing for illegal aliens i.e. do you have proof of citizenship or legal residency, no, OK, we will hold you for the judge to issue a demand you prove you are here legally.
This is nothing more than the same thing the Nazi’s did, except now rather than requiring papers, the police state is requiring your blood.
I am beyond upset by this and will not be responsible for how I may act if confronted by this tactic. Since our judiciary does not seem to have a problem with this blatent violation of free passage on the roadways, I wonder what form of protest is available, barreling through the road block? I would hate to become a martyr but somethings just have to stop.
I know that; but we can keep at them.
Doc. Read your driver lic. You waived the constitutional protection when you got it. There is no bill of rights when driving. None Zero Zip.