Comments (46) (Please sign in to comment)

1. 

   jackson49 said, 4 months ago

   Ted, U see this the past week? It’s about our brave drones.

   White House wins fight to keep drone killings of Americans secret
   jan 3. 2013
2. 

   dtroutma said, 4 months ago

   Well, medical personnel have to do the blood draw. I’m surprised at the rulling because for so long “drinkin’, drivin’, good ol’ boy” judges, and prosecutors, have long been sensitive about being “too harsh” on drunk drivers, even after they’ve killed someone. Now about that “field sobriety” that still stands in most jurisdictions as “evidence”, maybe judges are as hung up on the “forensics” and “science” as the publlic watching CSI who have no clue about how things REALLY work?
3. 

   Fourcrows said, 4 months ago

   Try being a diabetic. You get to draw your own blood between 3-7 times a day.
   Of course, I see your point, Ted. An American citizen should not be forced to self-incriminate for a traffic violation. Dashboard cameras should be more than sufficient evidence in a traffic stop, capturing both the driving and subsequent reactions of the suspect as evidence. I imagine the first person to claim they contracted AIDS or some other blood-borne disease from an improperly administered draw will become a millionaire. Not to mention the risk to the officers themselves, should the suspect have a virus.
   Plus, an unnecessary blood draw from a hemophiliac can result in injury. And people on chemotherapy, who may have a reaction to their meds and exhibit intoxicated behavior, may be fatally wounded by a simple draw not administered by their doctor.
4. 

   I Play One On TV said, 4 months ago

   All good points. Here’s an easy fix: if the driver refuses a breath-a-lyzer, he is automatically guilty of DUI. Want to prove you’re not? Blow.

   Too simple?
5. 

   masterskrain said, 4 months ago

   At one time there was a plan to allow the officers at weigh stations to draw urine samples from truckers they suspected of being on drugs, and to hold the drivers at the scales until the drug test results came through!
   I don’t believe that it ever passed, but it’s a scary thought that untrained cops might be given that much power.
   Kinda like the thugs that the TSA have pawing through your luggage and doing body searches at the airport…
6. 

   Radish said, 4 months ago

   If the blood test shows THC, how do you decide if the driver was intoxicated or not?
   You can always get the blood during the madatory strip search.
7. 

   Night-Gaunt49 said, 4 months ago

   Don’t you just love how the Drug War continues to rot our freedoms it moves to “protect us” in ways that would never have happened if they never enacted that law in 1914 then built upon it in the 1970’s.
   -
   “For the greater good” they will say, they take more of our rights.
   -
   A nice episode of Sliders called “California Reich” Hitler is unknown but the governor of California has instituted DNA tests and anyone not white is called an “immigrant” and sent away or murdered or turned into a mouthless slave. Young thugs in uniform attack and ‘arrest’ these immigrants and take them to a local gulag. Most get surgically altered into slaves. They manage to show the truth before they slide to another universe.
8. 

   Donald Williams said, 4 months ago

   @I Play One On TV

   Here’s an easy fix: if the driver refuses a breath-a-lyzer, he is automatically guilty of DUI.
   -————————————
   Usually your posts are relevant and cogent.
   .
   This one falls far short of your usual standard.
   .
   I have just one question:
   At what point did you surrender the legal requisite of “innocent until proved guilty”?
9. 

   Mhic Dhu Ghaill said, 4 months ago

   @dtroutma

   When VA finally lowered the limit to .08 one State Senator, Fears, commented “Now they have taken the sport ot of drinkin’!”
10. 

    TheTrustedMechanic said, 4 months ago

    @Fourcrows

    If I am not mistaken, and I’m sure the rabid haters will tell me if I am, the case is NOT about if the cop has the right to draw your blood, but rather a medical professional. A good friend of my wife lost her sister-in-law after a Black Friday traffic accident where the other driver was drunk. The SIL died 10 days later from her injuries. And then you and Ted want to make it easier for the bastard to get off? Despicable.
11. 

    TheTrustedMechanic said, 4 months ago

    @Night-Gaunt49

    Your rights end where they infringe upon mine. And one of those unalienable rights is to LIFE! So if you are deliberately, irresponsibly driving drunk and endangering me, then you are infringing upon my unalienable right to life. And yes protecting my (anybody’s) rights from your rights so we each have equal rights is “for the greater good.”
12. 

    TheTrustedMechanic said, 4 months ago

    @Donald Williams

    It is called reasonable suspicion, if the cop has enough doubt to pull you over then they have the right and obligation to investigate further.
13. 

    olfart said, 4 months ago

    @ TheTrustedMechanic
    No, I want to make it easier for the innocent to avoid being tied down, degraded, and violated.
14. 

    Stipple said, 4 months ago

    @Donald Williams

    I live in Alaska, we have quite the drinking problem here.
    .
    Refusing a breathalizer test does not make you drunk.
    .
    However, the law on the books puts refusing a request froman officer to submit to an alcohol check on a public highway is a felony.
    Refusal to blow in a breathalizer is a felony in Alaska. Thought I would say it twice.
    .
    This avoids the self incrimination, breathalizer refusal is a crime all unto itself.
    .
    The police report in the local paper lists refusals right along with drunk driving. Surprise surprise, the penalties are the same also.
15. 

    Ms. Ima said, 4 months ago

    LOL!!! Those poor brown skinned people have no chance in the eyes of liberals.
16. Load 15 more comments. | Load the rest (31).