From the 'what will it take to wake up the freepers' file:

[Fuzz]

Texas Police Will Take Blood By Force in DUI Cases

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.



and the freeper thread about it:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1484617/posts

[TallahasseeGrannie]

1. I'm conflicted about this.

Obvious infringement on personal rights... but then so is the drunk in my lane heading for me. I'll be interested in reading this thread as it develops.

[SteppingRazor]

3. I'm not conflicted at all about this....

the 4th amendment. Period.
If this isn't an unreasonable search and seizure, I don't know what is.

Jackbooted freakin' fascists...

[TallahasseeGrannie]

4. Forgive my almost total ignorance

in this area, but does the concept of probable cause fit in here?

I'm not arguing with you, but asking for information.

[SteppingRazor]

6. Probable cause allows the police to ask for tests...

For example, if your car is swerving down the street, they're allowed to ask for a breath test.
The very, very important thing to note here is that probable cause -- and the fact that you're behind the wheel of a car and therefore agreed to accept tests when you got your license -- ALLOWS them to ask for a breath test, not the other way around.

Also, depending somewhat on the state in question (and I'm not too familiar with the applicable, Texas laws), probable cause must be shown in the stop, direction, and arrest stages -- otherwise, subsequent evidence must be suppressed.

This is why a lot of DUI people are shocked to see their police reports -- evidence is often manufactured in order to justify further intrusion, to invent probable cause. So, a person may be seen leaving a bar and drive fine, but the cop pulls him over and writes on the police report that the person was swerving all voer the road. In doing so, they can demand a roadside test, which they technically can't do at a normal traffic stop.

I agree that drunk driving is a problem. But I feel intrusion on the rights of the governed is a far greater one. As it stands, DUI law has become all but draconian. The legal limit of .08 BAL means if one consumes JUST TWO DRINKS IN AN HOUR, one is legally drunk. The result is a massive increase in DUIs, with most of the drivers in question being perfectly safe behind the wheel. Thank MADD -- incidentally, the lady that started that organization, Candy Lightner, is now a spokesperson for the liquor lobby, having left the organization because of it's far-reaching, nigh pro-prohibition stances.

For all the bad the drug war has done in destroying the lives of nonviolent offenders, it doesn't hold a candle to DUI.

OK, I'll get off my soapbox now :)

[TallahasseeGrannie]

8. Well thanks for jumping on the soapbox

I didn't know that about MADD. The liquor lobby? Wow. Life is strange.

I am a person whose life has at times been really knocked about by alcohol. As I write this, my sister in in detox where I had to take her on Weds. She will probably die this year. This last binge she drank a fifth of vodka a day for six days. The binges are shorter now and more intense.

That said, this is her right. And I think personally that the money we waste on the "war on drugs" (guess we lost that one, too, huh?) would be much better spent on free rehab and detox and outpatient therapy. It would eliminate an entire strata of violence from our society.

But then we wouldn't have all that fun smashing into apartments and stuff, huh? And what would we watch on TV?

[Stockholm]

2. good they have to suffer personally otherwise they don´t give a ....n/t

[ispeculate]

5. So does someone that is qualified actually draw the blood?

Or does the judge do it? Or the cops?

There are alot of doctors that arent even good at finding a vein to draw blood. Its an art that requires practice.

Also, any time the skin is broken there is a risk of infection. Are they ready to pay out the big settlements for "medical malpractice" when this happens?

[anarch]

7. Texas police have always taken blood by force,

but they usually just leave it on the sidewalk.

[MadHound]

9. Have to agree with the freeps on this one

Kissing your fourth amendment rights goodbye, having to prove yourself innocent, having to get your blood drawn, against your will, at the tender hands of law enforcement. Sorry, but this is way too over the top.

This is a direct result of the precedence set by piss testing for drugs. Invasive seizure of one's body fluids. And oh, if you smoked a joint a week ago, you can and will be charged with it. And what a fine way for law enforcement to get a nice DNA sample for their files.

This is simply more jack booted fascism, trampling all over one's rights. And look for this slippery slope precedence to lead to ever increasing invasions of even our own bodies.

I hope that this is challenged in court, though I'm all but convinced that it will be upheld. Bad legislation, bad for everybody.

[yorgatron]

10. it's the communists!

"I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids."