100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: cops out for blood | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Police: Blood draws will help stop drunk drivers
To get around breath test refusals, more officers take syringe to suspects ------ ...... It's all part of training he and a select cadre of officers in Idaho and Texas have received in recent months to draw blood from those suspected of drunken or drugged driving. The federal program's aim is to determine if blood draws by cops can be an effective tool against drunk drivers and aid in their prosecution. ...... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32824729/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/ ==================== another hit to the fifth amendment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Police: Blood draws will help stop drunk drivers To get around breath test refusals, more officers take syringe to suspects ------ ...... It's all part of training he and a select cadre of officers in Idaho and Texas have received in recent months to draw blood from those suspected of drunken or drugged driving. The federal program's aim is to determine if blood draws by cops can be an effective tool against drunk drivers and aid in their prosecution. ...... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32824729/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/ ==================== another hit to the fifth amendment Oh yeah, and I really trust a cop to draw my blood. The fun people in the lab at the hospital can barely do it right, without blowing a vein, missing or something else thats fun. Nevermind that there's a huge potential for abuse as well. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
well i dont trust a nurse going near my body with a needle let alone a cop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
not saying taking blood to prove drunk driving is the right way...but how is the best way? people yell because of drunk drivers but no solutions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it was in the Supreme Court a few months ago and they ruled that it is constitutional and legal for the police to take your blood against your will
thats what has started all this |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it was in the Supreme Court a few months ago and they ruled that it is constitutional and legal for the police to take your blood against your will thats what has started all this I'm not doubting that. what could be the alternatives? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
this is the alternative it's in testing for approval by the Dept of Transportation right now and will prolly start showing up in cop cars in the next few years it works every time, is more accurate than blood or urine or breath and is MUCH cheaper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hello War Machine,
I’ll be D----, I agree with you on cops and blood. Now if you could just get your head screwed on straight about 9/11. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They have been drawing blood on DUI suspects in Arizona for years! This is nothing new.
If you refuse to give a voluntary blood sample, they get a warrant and take your blood anyway. In addition, just because you refused, your license is suspended for 12 months. I think Arizona has some of the toughest DUI laws in the nation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think this is a good idea if a breath test is refused they should draw blood.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think this is a good idea if a breath test is refused they should draw blood. People were beating the breath tests in court so Arizona changed the laws and now REQUIRES Blood samples be taken. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think this is a good idea if a breath test is refused they should draw blood. if you refuse a breath test in most states they automatically file a warrant to draw your blood AND charge you the lab fees (around $150) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not only is this blatantly Statist, but unnecessary. As I mentioned in another thread, drunk drivers are safter than other drivers (cell-phone users, make-up applyers, etc.) Plus, since being drunk causes no harm to any other person, it cannot logically be considered a "crime".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Quietman_2009
on
Sun 09/13/09 05:59 PM
|
|
Not only is this blatantly Statist, but unnecessary. As I mentioned in another thread, drunk drivers are safter than other drivers (cell-phone users, make-up applyers, etc.) Plus, since being drunk causes no harm to any other person, it cannot logically be considered a "crime". 
oh you're serious |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think they should give drunk drivers the death penalty.
Their organs would be mostly preserved and someone else could get good use from them before the drunk got a chance to ruin them.  
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not only is this blatantly Statist, but unnecessary. As I mentioned in another thread, drunk drivers are safter than other drivers (cell-phone users, make-up applyers, etc.) Plus, since being drunk causes no harm to any other person, it cannot logically be considered a "crime".
oh you're serious Your reading assignment while I laugh at your lack of critical thinking -
The Pathetic Argument for prohibiting drunk driving-http://www.lewrockwell.com/crovelli/crovelli33.1.html Legalize Drunk Driving http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/drunkdriving.html Open Letter to MADD http://www.lewrockwell.com/block/block128.html A Primer on logic for drunk driving prohibitionists http://www.lewrockwell.com/crovelli/crovelli17.html |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not only is this blatantly Statist, but unnecessary. As I mentioned in another thread, drunk drivers are safter than other drivers (cell-phone users, make-up applyers, etc.) Plus, since being drunk causes no harm to any other person, it cannot logically be considered a "crime".
oh you're serious He must be joking, right?
|
|
|
|
|
