View Single Post
Unread 01-02-2011, 12:51 PM   #16
Shadow
Senior Member
 
Shadow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: port of indecision
Posts: 5,604
Name :
Shadow will become famous soon enough
Default

My replies in red below for brevity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tampa Tuning View Post
1) This wont deter anyone from drinking and driving anymore than the electric chair deters anyone from murder. Education for drinking and driving is the most effective.

I agree. Education and proactive work on the part of bar and restaurant owners/employees will do more than the enformcement.
Pinellas County shut down it's DUI squad due to cost vs. benefit.
Overall, DUI "squads" are inneffective resources.


2) I think in the fine print you signed for a drivers license, it says you have to submit to sobirity test or lose your license.

Implied consent.

3) Check points have been held up in courts because its a privaledge granted by the state to drive a vehicle.

Checkpoints have been ruled constitutional, as long as they follow certain guidelines. I don't think anyones' concerned about the checkpoints.

4) The drawing blood part at check points. Its a good work around loop hole in the process to have a judge at the check point. Example. The officer has cause to believe you've been drinking and requests you to submit to sobrity tests. You refused everything. He walks 20 feet over to the judge and swears out a search warrant to seize your blood because he thinks there's enough PC to believe you've been drinking or druging. Judge signs a pre-processed fill in the blanks warrant, and they either take you to the hospital or have an EMT at the scene to withdraw evidence from your body.

This is we will have to differ my friend.
It's not a work around, and there's no real loophole.
THere is NO PROVISION in the statute for a search warrant or a mandatory blood draw, on a non-crash, no injury basic DUI.
The implied consent is present; however, if you refuse, the administrative action is loss of license.
the "criminal" section of the refusal is redundant with the administrative actions.
The guidelines are black and white. No gray areas in this one.
Officer suspects, requests, you refuse.
Go to jail, lose license...the rest is a court battle.
Nothing allows a warrant or the application of force to draw blood.


Its a pretty easy process which can be done any day of the week if everyone is in place.

If we as citizens allow this to occur, you're right. Then what's next?

I just dont see these check points happening often. Judges will have to work weekends and holiday nights to sign warrants. If your an elected official, your didnt get elected to bust your ass working nights and weekends with patrol units.

Another good point. It could be done via video, and the judge woud never have to leave his/her rum and coke!
I've never seen this, and until now, never heard of it. If it is true and continues, I hope the judges have to come out on the coldest nights in North Florida and freeze thier asses off like the rest of us....


Hospital nurses or EMTs wont be thrilled getting subpeonas weekly. If a judge witnesses the drunk at the scene, he or she becomes a witness and will have to recuse himself/herself from the case causing more backlog for other judges.
Very true. That will get interesting very quickly.

So the manpower strain will be an issue. Realistically you can do this today via telephone call to the judge requesting a search and seizure warrant. With wireless internet communications, its that much easier.
Except that the judge has to witness the event. Of course we refer to my previous statement re: video...

Im for it but I dont see it happening much
I'm dead set against it!
I hate DUI drivers, but what I despise even more, are those that will attempt to circumvent or subvert the system in the name of "safety and security!"
__________________

Remember:
Artificial Intelligence is no replacement for Natural Stupidity!

Be Polite, Be Professional...and have a plan to kill everyone you meet.
Shadow is offline   Reply With Quote