To Protect and to Serve II

[Rickyvol77]

Well, I haven't read too much into that story after going over there, but I'll look into it more a bit later.

But it bothers me that we have cops/law enforcement taking blood samples.

You sign up for it when you agree to getting a drivers license. Don’t use drugs or drink and drive. Pretty simple concept

 

[85SugarVol]

Well, I haven't read too much into that story after going over there, but I'll look into it more a bit later.

But it bothers me that we have cops/law enforcement taking blood samples.

Technically it was a 3rd party “Rent-a-MedTech”…

But the floor of the garage at the police station is not the place imo. Seems to be you would want a sterile location with trained staff for evidence collection.

 

[85SugarVol]

You sign up for it when you agree to getting a drivers license. Don’t use drugs or drink and drive. Pretty simple concept

And if blood is drawn and the outcome is “innocent” of all charges and accusations? What then?

 

[Rickyvol77]

And if blood is drawn and the outcome is “innocent” of all charges and accusations? What then?

Charges are dropped. But that’s a rare occurrence because it’s pretty obvious when people fail sobriety tests.

 

[VolStrom]

Charges are dropped. But that’s a rare occurrence because it’s pretty obvious when people fail sobriety tests.

Your answer is like the newspaper reporting people charged with a crime but are never reported as not guilty when they are found "not guilty" or charges are dropped. Why is that?

 

[Rickyvol77]

Your answer is like the newspaper reporting people charged with a crime but are never reported as not guilty when they are found "not guilty" or charges are dropped. Why is that?

Huh? I don’t care about the media or what they report

 

[85SugarVol]

Charges are dropped. But that’s a rare occurrence because it’s pretty obvious when people fail sobriety tests.

We rarely execute innocent people.

What recourse should John Q Citizen have after law enforcement has already seized his blood?

 

[Rickyvol77]

We rarely execute innocent people.

What recourse should John Q Citizen have after law enforcement has already seized his blood?

What do you mean? Law enforcement pretty much knows when someone is drunk or high before blood comes into play. It’s just the final nail. They were right about this guy as well

 

[85SugarVol]

What do you mean? Law enforcement pretty much knows when someone is drunk or high before blood comes into play. It’s just the final nail. They were right about this guy as well

If we can agree that police officers (like all other humans) are fallible creatures -

What should be the citizen’s recourse when law enforcement gets it wrong?

 

[Rickyvol77]

If we can agree that police officers (like all other humans) are fallible creatures -

What should be the citizen’s recourse when law enforcement gets it wrong?

Of course. That’s what lawsuits are for.

 

[85SugarVol]

Of course. That’s what lawsuits are for.

And the officer that just “knew” they were intoxicated?

 

[Rickyvol77]

And the officer that just “knew” they were intoxicated?

They were intoxicated

 

[85SugarVol]

They were intoxicated

No. The scenario we were discussing where law enforcement was incorrect.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Technically it was a 3rd party “Rent-a-MedTech”…

But the floor of the garage at the police station is not the place imo. Seems to be you would want a sterile location with trained staff for evidence collection.

If I'm not mistaken (and I could be), I think in Tennessee they can do it on the roadside.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Charges are dropped. But that’s a rare occurrence because it’s pretty obvious when people fail sobriety tests.

Charges are dropped? Wait, so they are charged before the blood draw even determines if they are drunk or not?

 

[Rickyvol77]

Charges are dropped? Wait, so they are charged before the blood draw even determines if they are drunk or not?

Yes blood draws aren’t instantaneous. But 99.9% of dui arrests are valid due to failed sobriety.

 

[Rickyvol77]

If I'm not mistaken (and I could be), I think in Tennessee they can do it on the roadside.

You’re mistaken

 

[85SugarVol]

Yes blood draws aren’t instantaneous. But 99.9% of dui arrests are valid due to failed sobriety.

And in the 0.01% where law enforcement is wrong, what should happen?

 

[85SugarVol]

If I'm not mistaken (and I could be), I think in Tennessee they can do it on the roadside.

That would be ridiculous

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

What do you mean? Law enforcement pretty much knows when someone is drunk or high before blood comes into play. It’s just the final nail. They were right about this guy as well

Let me remind you that the officers involved in pulling over Allen West's wife were damn sure she was drunk.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Of course. That’s what lawsuits are for.

So the taxpayers are on the hook for cops f^^king up?

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

They were intoxicated

Nice dodge...

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

You’re mistaken

Yeah, but apparently it is going on in other states.

Police are now taking roadside blood samples to catch impaired drivers

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

That would be ridiculous

Police are now taking roadside blood samples to catch impaired drivers

A DUI police van equipped with a special chair and table for blood testing pulled up. The man refused to submit to a blood draw. So Layden grabbed his laptop and filled out an electronic warrant, or e-warrant, which was transmitted directly to a judge.

 

[Rickyvol77]

Yeah, but apparently it is going on in other states.

Police are now taking roadside blood samples to catch impaired drivers

Ok. So?