In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 1833
Online now 2177 Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)
We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.
Where the madness isn't just in March.
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Frankly this doesn't change much. A judge is almost always going to believe the cop and there are cameras that record the sobriety test and the entire stop so if a person is drunk there will be evidence. Also if a warrant is obtained the test can be conducted, a judge will almost always grant the warrant. Like I said it really doesn't change anything at all.
They have no-refusal weekends where I live. Usually holidays and if you refuse a breath test, there are judges issuing warrants for blood tests.
The DA here got arrested for a DWI a few days ago.
Would anyone here be be against mandated Breathalyzers in cars?
Seems simple. Maybe expensive but this is one thing I wouldn't mind seeing the government spend money on.
This post was edited by beardown2489 12 months ago
Teein' Off on Links
A "no-refusal weekend"? wow. Perhaps they should just have "home-search Tuesdays" as well.
I think there should be a government monitor at every home and if you get within 10 feet of a vehicle with alcohol in your hand you should be shot on the spot. And you children should also be killed for good measure.
Prevention is easy.
Laugh at me all you want.
This is different than a gun control argument.
Drunk humans can call a cab. Drunk driving isnt a sport or recreational activity that the constitution gives you the right to particpate in.
Drinking is optional. I do a lot of it. Give up the keys.
Every time I read your name all I see is "TrollTide"
Well I hate to disappoint you, but I am not a troll. I just believe strongly in things and express my opinions, I have been pretty consistent with my stances on here for a long time now, which would probably not be the case if I were trolling.
I do think we need crackdowns on DD, and very strict punishments and enforcement, but forcing blood out of people without at least the court's assent is wrong.
Read one of my earlier post, this isn't going to change much anyway.
I don't believe they should take blood either but if they can refuse breathalyzers how can evidence be gathered?
Video of a sobriety test will usually do it, drunk people usually show it. Also the testimony of the police is usually going to be enough as well. But at any rate these warrants aren't going to be that hard to get, read in your own article where it discusses that, technology is making far easier to acquire warrants quickly.
Also they can still be detained and take off the street that night and would still have to pay for a lawyer which ain't cheap. So even if they do "get off" they aren't really getting off scot-free.
1 It would be extremely expensive relative to the actually benefit.
2 In some places you are allowed to drive drunk on your own property.
You must be someone who drinks and drive's a lot
Willie beat me to citing Fla law. Most DUIs just go by a combination of LEO observations, FSTs and then the breathalyzer. Video as well. In my county you can end up with video from the cruiser's dash, in the intox room and the booking and intake areas from the jail all as evidence to show how intoxicated someone is. In most smaller counties they rarely ever draw blood because they don't want to foot the bill and don't want to tie officers up that long by transporting and guarding drunks.
I don't see why anyone has a problem with No Refusal weekends though. The same burden of proof exists to get a warrant as always. The only difference is judges are on call to grant the warrant at 3 am instead of calling around and hoping someone is up and in a good mood.
It is absolutely amazing to see just where people fall on this issue when considering their political leanings. The tough-on-crime crowd always seems to fall into the republican "we protect your rights" crowd, though they don't really want to protect your rights, it seems... protecting a citizen from an unwanted blood test is a very big deal for all americans... seems like the repubs only think your rights matter is if they happen to matter to the repubs in whatever situation they might be at the moment
seems like the aclu is at least more consistant with their stands on things...
www.yohoodent.com ... errybawdee awn ignorle
First part isn't true. Plenty of people get brought in, blow well over the legal limit, and walk around just fine. They go to court and the lawyer says they had slight problems with the FSTs because of a bad leg or something similar. Cop says they smelled drunk, lawyer says they have diabetes or spilled a drink. If for some reason nobody ever had to blow again DUI convictions would fall. And personally I doubt the loss of cash evens out to the same impact as a few months sitting in jail. Personally I think DUIs should result in more than just a fine, which is what relying on the cost of legal defense to have an impact basically would be.
You shouldn't have to go to jail for days, weeks, or months for a first time DUI. After that then probably.
3 time POTW, member since 2006, MLWTI: 4-3
Really? That's your takeaway? It's 2 legal activities that when combined are illegal. The only way to know beyond suspicion if someone is performing both at the same time is to invade his/her body.
I guaran-damn-tee you have an issue with checking citizenship documents but not this, and that's just taking your wallet or purse out.
Please respond without epithets and nonsense like usual.
really? that's what you figure?
not that a warrant is necessary (and should be?)
"I guaran-damn-tee you have an issue with checking citizenship documents but not this, and that's just taking your wallet or purse out."
this sentence right here pretty much says it all for you... you should read, or at least try.
I have a cousin that had three DUI's and was still driving when he got a 4th. He got deployed for two years the next week and he was allowed to drive military vehicles for his transportation unit. Wen he got back all he got was a slap on the wrist. These people never learn til they either kill someone or themselves
When was this the 60s?
Because if you are military you get discharged with just one DUI now...I mean just one and you are gone. Been that way for several years now.
it's amazing in this world that people so easily want to let government into their lives even more than they should be. i just smh at times when i read stuff like above. i was talking to a guy who wanted to argue it would make sense to let the government have it put into cars that if you go 10 over the speed limit that you automatically get a speeding ticket. his reasoning was it would help the government by getting them more money (state or federal he didn't care) and it would stop speeders. smh
Johnny Dwight commits to Bama on 6/4/13 ranked the 44th DT in the nation by 247sports and 87 rating a 3 star. Now see the Bama bump.
I am not disputing your numbers but remember all accidents involving a person over the limit are automatically attributed to the alcohol. I have a cousin who went from HS to prison for 3 years because of a wreck in which he was over the legal limit but was not the cause of the wreck. It was determined that the was on the right side of the road but since he was drunk he was automatically at fault and it is automatically a "drunk driving" fatality. People die every day from car wrecks that do not involve a person drinking. How each person reacts to alcohol is different and .08 or .1 is not a great determination of impairment. I think the field sobriety test is a much better indicator.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by dpfenny 12 months ago
Scored 4 touchdowns...in a single game. Polk High!
1) States can respond to this ruling with creative local laws if they don't like it.
2) I like the ruling. Any decision that beefs up the Fourth Amendment is welcome in my book, as that Amendment (and the First, and the Second, and the Fifth, and the Eighth, etc.) has taken a beating in the past 40-50 years or so.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports