More police officers drawing blood to prove DUI!?

[Silcc69]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32824729/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

WTF is this country coming too?

[JohnnyWalkerBlackLabel]

I got pulled over last night, they had the flares out and called it a "rolling police checkpoint" LMAOOOOOOO
only in NY

gave them my info, pulled in front of the cop car, 2 mins later they walk up say ty, I say have a great night sarcastically and speed off

I'd like to apologize to the chick I hung up on when I realized they were going to do a checkpoint.

[DaveinBoston]

Yea... god what is this country coming to? Police officers using all the tools at their disposal to enforce laws. Insanity!


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32824729/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

WTF is this country coming too?

[SarahG]

I feel bad for anyone who is afraid of needles who gets stopped by a department testing this idea.

[CaptainGeech]

Saw this a couple days ago. I'm sure there will be a law that indicates that you can refuse the field blood test. Much like you can refuse the field breathalyzer test. But from what I've read they're going to be able to forcefully take blood in some states. Literally jumping on someone, restraining them, and holding them down while a needle is in there arm or hand. That is setting them up for SOOOO many lawsuits. There is a big difference between having your blood taken on the hood of a dirty cop car compared to having it taken in a controlled police lab. I am sure the clever lawyers will have no problem proving those tests to be inadmissible.

[JerseyMike]

Obama be president now

[PatrickFromNYC]

As a life long NYC resident I fucking hate the bridge and tunnel drunk drivers who drive into Manhattan. Take a cab or train or even better yet stay in the fucking suburbs.

[scroller]

This is pretty sick. I'm surprised by how many people are ok with random cops being empowered to jab people on the street with needles.

[SarahG]

This is pretty sick. I'm surprised by how many people are ok with random cops being empowered to jab people on the street with needles.

It's not surprising if you think about it.

Look at how many people think its a fucking joke whenever cops go running around beating or electrocuting those who offended them.

The country doesn't react with horror, worry, or shock... but laughing while immortalizing "don't taze me bro"

It's only a small jump to go from power-trip executions of innocent BOUND (handcuffed) citizens to letting cops detain and forcefully pierce the veins of those they merely suspect of being drunk while driving...

Look at what we not only put up with, but defend in the name of being "tough on crime" and then think about what it would take to actually get our bread & circus appeased citizens to give two shits.

[lochaber]

wow.

I don't even know how to react to this...

All I can do is imagine the nearly limitless ways it will be abused. I can only imagine how many people are going to end up sitting in a cell w/ about a dozen punctures in their arm because they were 'resisting' or some such.

Also, I can imagine it would be really easy to spike the samples to ensure everyone is up in the 0.2 range or something...

I have heard that blood tests are supposed to be more accurate, and are legal options in some (most?) states, but I was under the impression that it was going to be done in controlled conditions, not at night on the hood of some cop's car who may or may not be trying to prove his dominance of the situation...

Granted, I don't approve of drunk driving, but I think our nation as a whole is going about trying to solve it in about the most back-asswards way possible. Ensure that people have other options (i.e., don't harass/detain/arrest people who are walking home instead of driving, have public transportation run later, etc., etc.)

disappointing, but not too surprising...

[TommyFoxtrot]

This is pretty sick. I'm surprised by how many people are ok with random cops being empowered to jab people on the street with needles.

I doubt this. Just for liability alone, a nurse/emt would be present if not required to draw the blood themselves. I don't see this taking off much outside of the western states, where it may be very far from a hospital.

"The officer phlebotomists are generally trained under the same program as their state's hospital or clinical phlebotomists, but they do it under a highly compressed schedule, and for some the curriculum is cut.

That's because officers don't need to know how to draw blood from a foot or other difficult sites, or from an infant or medically fragile patient, said Nicole Watson, the College of Western Idaho phlebotomy instructor teaching the Idaho officers."

This part scares me, how is this officer going to know for sure if someone is medically fragile or not?

[Thatiger23]

just ask for a warrant lol or you could deny it completely

[TommyFoxtrot]

just ask for a warrant lol or you could deny it completely


Apparently the Idado Supreme Court has ruled you do not need a warrant to draw blood.

[Thatiger23]

just ask for a warrant lol or you could deny it completely


Apparently the Idado Supreme Court has ruled you do not need a warrant to draw blood.

well if thats the case just deny the test..

[lochaber]

well, the way I understood that article, is that the cops don't need a warrant or your permission. They can physically restrain you and take the blood sample by force.

Also, I really doubt a cop is going to give up getting a blood sample because someone is old, fragile, or whatever else... just gouge away till that vial fills...

[hippifried]

I think somebody'd have to be pretty stupid, or ignorant, or both to let a cop draw blood.

A breathalyzer is one thing. Everybody has to exhale anyway, & there are laws in states to compel compliance. But blood circulates in a closed system. Needles are totally invasive. Even hospitals aren't allowed to draw blood & run tox screens unless you give permission or you're unconscious. If you think about it, how is this different from kicking in somebody's door?

If a cop wants to draw my blood, he better have a medical licence & a warrent. Even then, I'd probably balk, & I'd definitely be demanding a lawyer first. This isn't about public safety. It's a search for evidence of criminal wrongdoing. As far as I know, self incrimination still can't be compelled.

[scroller]

From the AP article: "The nation's highest court ruled in 1966 that police could have blood tests forcibly done on a drunk driving suspect without a warrant... Once they're back on patrol, they will draw blood of any suspected drunk driver who refuses a breath test. They'll use force if they need to, such as getting help from another officer to pin down a suspect and potentially strap them down, Watson said."

[SarahG]

This is pretty sick. I'm surprised by how many people are ok with random cops being empowered to jab people on the street with needles.

I doubt this. Just for liability alone, a nurse/emt would be present if not required to draw the blood themselves. I don't see this taking off much outside of the western states, where it may be very far from a hospital.

"The officer phlebotomists are generally trained under the same program as their state's hospital or clinical phlebotomists, but they do it under a highly compressed schedule, and for some the curriculum is cut.

That's because officers don't need to know how to draw blood from a foot or other difficult sites, or from an infant or medically fragile patient, said Nicole Watson, the College of Western Idaho phlebotomy instructor teaching the Idaho officers."

This part scares me, how is this officer going to know for sure if someone is medically fragile or not?

1- They won't know, because they're not medical professionals, whether or not someone is medically frail
2- If a driver knows they need blood taken from a difficult & unusual location, what's to say the cop will believe them or listen to them?

[SarahG]

just ask for a warrant lol or you could deny it completely

You don't have a choice, if you'd read the article you'd see that the courts have allowed the cops to use physical force to acquire the blood if you don't comply.

Meaning they jump on you, detain you, and then forcefully thrust the needle into your arm (ever have blood drawn as a kid while your muscles were taunt? Ever had a nurse use too much force? This would be worse...) if you don't cooperate.

Also, in most states if you refuse to prove your sober when challenged, it invalidates your driver's license so saying "no, I don't want you to fucking pierce my arm" will mean you'll no longer be allowed to drive...

[worldbro]

I think somebody'd have to be pretty stupid, or ignorant, or both to let a cop draw blood.
If a cop wants to draw my blood, he better have a medical licence & a warrent. Even then, I'd probably balk, & I'd definitely be demanding a lawyer first. This isn't about public safety. It's a search for evidence of criminal wrongdoing. As far as I know, self incrimination still can't be compelled.

lol you must be white

[TommyFoxtrot]

This is pretty sick. I'm surprised by how many people are ok with random cops being empowered to jab people on the street with needles.

I doubt this. Just for liability alone, a nurse/emt would be present if not required to draw the blood themselves. I don't see this taking off much outside of the western states, where it may be very far from a hospital.

"The officer phlebotomists are generally trained under the same program as their state's hospital or clinical phlebotomists, but they do it under a highly compressed schedule, and for some the curriculum is cut.

That's because officers don't need to know how to draw blood from a foot or other difficult sites, or from an infant or medically fragile patient, said Nicole Watson, the College of Western Idaho phlebotomy instructor teaching the Idaho officers."

This part scares me, how is this officer going to know for sure if someone is medically fragile or not?

1- They won't know, because they're not medical professionals, whether or not someone is medically frail
2- If a driver knows they need blood taken from a difficult & unusual location, what's to say the cop will believe them or listen to them?


Or if the person will even tell them, or know for sure? This is just a bad idea all around.

[loren]

vampire cops :lol: Just in time for Halloween :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Justawannabe]

The potential to put a little drug in the syringe and pop it directly into your system is frightening.

What about transplant patients and others with compromised immune systems? Diabetics, where you should avoid punching holes if you can...

I don't understand the basis of this whole thing. I can refuse to be breath tested but I can't refuse an invasive procedure like this?

[SarahG]

What about transplant patients and others with compromised immune systems? Diabetics, where you should avoid punching holes if you can...

Scary isn't it? All a cop has to do is say they suspect you were drunk driving. Not exactly a tough standard, or a lot of oversight here...

And what happens when someone is found innocent? "Oh sorry I and three other cops jumped on you and pinned you down while we forced this sharp object into your arm... we thought you MIGHT have been drunk!"

[fred41]

This is just a bad idea for soooooooo many reasons.

[lochaber]

And what happens when someone is found innocent?

I highly doubt that anyone will be found innocent with this. Already, its rare that someone is found innocent when they are suspected of drunk driving. From what I've heard, once you've been given a breathalyzer, the best you can hope for is a 'wet reckless'

I'm not too sure how much a concern is the cops injecting people with stuff, but it would be rather easy to doctor the samples afterwards. I'm willing to bet that after a bit of research on the internet, and maybe a spot of trial or error, I would be able to come up with an effective ratio of ethanol/saline solution, where you would just add a predetermined number of drops to a sample to bump it up by .08%

Already, cops have far too much power/authority, and far too little oversight. Not that all cops are bad, but it just takes a few corrupt ones to spoil the whole lot. And then there is that bit about power corrupting, etc.

[OEMEnemyNum1]

Well theres enough case for a lawsuit. Certain religions dont allow for things like blood being drawn and even dna samples.

I can definitely throw out a couple statements like that, then lets see what kind of shit you can stir up.

I actually live in Idaho so we'll see what happens my way.

My first thought is to mention that I have some kind of infectious blood disease, then make sure I wiggle around and possibly get a bunch on the officer. See what he thinks about that.

[lochaber]

And what happens when someone is found innocent?

I highly doubt that anyone will be found innocent with this. Already, its rare that someone is found innocent when they are suspected of drunk driving. From what I've heard, once you've been given a breathalyzer, the best you can hope for is a 'wet reckless'

I'm not too sure how much a concern is the cops injecting people with stuff, but it would be rather easy to doctor the samples afterwards. I'm willing to bet that after a bit of research on the internet, and maybe a spot of trial or error, I would be able to come up with an effective ratio of ethanol/saline solution, where you would just add a predetermined number of drops to a sample to bump it up by .08%

Already, cops have far too much power/authority, and far too little oversight. Not that all cops are bad, but it just takes a few corrupt ones to spoil the whole lot. And then there is that bit about power corrupting, etc.

[thx1138]

wait until everyone is forced to get 'chipped". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeAiJzGW6vk

[loren]

wait until everyone is forced to get 'chipped". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeAiJzGW6vk :roll: :roll:

That's a clip from another movie I'll never watch.

[Silcc69]

wait until everyone is forced to get 'chipped". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeAiJzGW6vk

I hope that never passes.