The ALL Florida Online Corvette Club








Corvette Top Sites

Go Back   The ALL Florida Online Corvette Club > Florida Specific Forums > The Police Blotter

      Photo Gallery Screen Saver!      

The Police Blotter This forum is for the purpose of alerting our readers of thefts and robberies. The idea is that WE can all keep our eyes peeled for the stuff and maybe catch those creeps.

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 01-01-2011, 07:18 PM   #1
Jake_Dragon
That Guy
 
Jake_Dragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Home
Posts: 345
Name : Jake
Jake_Dragon is on a distinguished road
Default "no refusal" checkpoints

Quote:
Tampa, Florida-- With New Year's Eve only days away, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration expects this to be one of the deadliest weeks of the year on the roads.

But now a new weapon is being used in the fight against drunk driving.

It's a change that could make you more likely to be convicted.

"I think it's a great deterrent for people," said Linda Unfried, from Mother's Against Drunk Driving in Hillsborough County.

Florida is among several states now holding what are called "no refusal" checkpoints.

It means if you refuse a breath test during a traffic stop, a judge is on site, and issues a warrant that allows police to perform a mandatory blood test.

It's already being done in several counties, and now Unfried is working to bring it to the Tampa Bay area.

"I think you'll see the difference because people will not drink and drive. I truly believe that," she said.

Not everyone is on board, though.

DUI defense attorney Kevin Hayslett sees the mandatory blood test as a violation of constitutional rights.

"It's a slippery slope and it's got to stop somewhere," Hayslett explained, "what other misdemeanor offense do we have in the United States where the government can forcefully put a needle into your arm?"

The federal government says Florida has among the highest rates of breathalyzer refusal.

"Now you've got attorneys telling their clients, don't blow, don't blow! Because we know from the results from these machines that they're not operating as the state or the government says they're supposed to operate," said Stephen Daniels, a DUI consultant and expert witness.

Supporters, though, say you could see the "no refusal" checkpoints in the Bay area by October.

"We don't want to violate people's civil rights. That's the last thing we want to do, but we're here to save lives," Unfried said.

She adds that this type of checkpoint would be heavily advertised, with the goal of deterring any drunk driving.

U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has recently said he wants to see more states hold similar programs.
How can this be legal? What is the probable cause to stop someone just because they are driving a car.
Jake_Dragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 01-01-2011, 08:43 PM   #2
Rich Z
Internet Sanitation Engineer
 
Rich Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Crawfordville, FL
Posts: 14,742
Name : Rich Zuchowski
Rich Z will become famous soon enoughRich Z will become famous soon enough
Default

Yeah, I'm not keen about people driving under the influence, but damned if I want to think that if someone mistakes my being a bit distracted while driving as being intoxicated that I could be FORCED to have blood drawn from me alongside the road. Do they have trained doctors and nurses there with them as well?

Talk about a perfect example of trading freedom for security...

This crap is getting REAL ridiculous....
__________________
Rich Z is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 01-01-2011, 09:51 PM   #3
Bob K
Deceased
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Sunshine State
Posts: 1,268
Name : Bob Korreck
Bob K has disabled reputation
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Z View Post
Yeah, I'm not keen about people driving under the influence, but damned if I want to think that if someone mistakes my being a bit distracted while driving as being intoxicated that I could be FORCED to have blood drawn from me alongside the road. Do they have trained doctors and nurses there with them as well?

Talk about a perfect example of trading freedom for security...

This crap is getting REAL ridiculous....
Wow, what a mess. I am really in favor of this law, but as you say we have to be concerned about our rights. I would like Shadow and other LEO's to comment. I find it hard to believe that some innocent guy would be convicted of DUI if indeed he was maybe just distracted or even just stopped at a check point.

If a person has been drinking and there is some doubt as to whether they are over the limit it seems to me if they're that close to being over then get them off the road. Have you ever driven on a two lane road and wondered if there was an impaired person driving the car coming at you? I have and it's a scary thought.

I have also been behind cars and it was obvious the driver was impaired and I don't hesitate to call 911 on the cell. I have no way of knowing if they're drunk, sick or just tired but they need to be stopped. The last one was on a two lane road and they were all over the place. The car swerved just in time to miss a bridge abutment and I really think the person would have been killed if they hit it.

A doctor or nurse is not a requirement to draw blood. The person just has to be trained and certified. I would be more concerned about who and how the blood is being tested.
Bob K is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 01-01-2011, 11:08 PM   #4
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

This is the first I've heard of it, and would like to know exactly which counties are operating this way, and for how long?

It violates the basic premise of both the 4th:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_...s_Constitution

and 5th amendment:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_A...s_Constitution

against self incrimination and unlawful search & seizure.

Driving is a priviledge, one that can and will be revoked for non-compliance with the law (failure to submit to a lawful test...); however, I don't find anywhere in the statute, where having a judge on scene or otherwise, exempts law enforcement from the responsibility to act within the constitution!

If the suspected DUI driver were involved in a fatal or serious injury crash, then there is a provision for forced compliance by a qualified professional.

I suspect if they attempt to move forward with such chit in this county, they'll find themselves in the losing end of an expensive (read that taxpayer funded) lawsuit(s).
I also expect to see cases either dismissed prior to trial by another judge (one with some fecking sense!) or overturned on appeal at a higher level.

As others have said, I'm all for DUI enforcement.
Hell, I'm all for devised installed in cars that identify the driver and restrict your ability to start the vehicle above a certain BAC.

But I'm NOT willing to throw aside my constitutional right, for ANY reason, in tha name of safety or security....and for the record, I've been the VICTIM of a drunk driver caused crash.

The courts have once again overstepped thier authority (IMO) and when identified, the judges involved should be protested and as citizens, we should campaign to have them removed from office.

If the Sheriff or Chief of Police condone this blatant act of impropiety, then we as citizens, have a constitutional responsibility to work diligently to see that they have the ability to draw thier unemployment come next election if not sooner.
In the case of a Chief, the Mayor needs to go!

...just my humble opinion of course
__________________

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
Unread 01-01-2011, 11:26 PM   #5
Bob K
Deceased
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Sunshine State
Posts: 1,268
Name : Bob Korreck
Bob K has disabled reputation
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow View Post
This is the first I've heard of it, and would like to know exactly which counties are operating this way, and for how long?

It violates the basic premise of both the 4th:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_...s_Constitution

and 5th amendment:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_A...s_Constitution

against self incrimination and unlawful search & seizure.

Driving is a priviledge, one that can and will be revoked for non-compliance with the law (failure to submit to a lawful test...); however, I don't find anywhere in the statute, where having a judge on scene or otherwise, exempts law enforcement from the responsibility to act within the constitution!
I guess I don't understand what you're saying so I'm going to disagree for now.

If you're on duty and pull over a suspected intoxicated driver don't you tell them they have to take a breathalyzer test? If they refuse don't you take them to jail? And then to court? See where I'm going with this?

Looks to me like they're just expediting the process.
Bob K is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 01-01-2011, 11:54 PM   #6
Rich Z
Internet Sanitation Engineer
 
Rich Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Crawfordville, FL
Posts: 14,742
Name : Rich Zuchowski
Rich Z will become famous soon enoughRich Z will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob K View Post
I have also been behind cars and it was obvious the driver was impaired and I don't hesitate to call 911 on the cell. I have no way of knowing if they're drunk, sick or just tired but they need to be stopped. The last one was on a two lane road and they were all over the place. The car swerved just in time to miss a bridge abutment and I really think the person would have been killed if they hit it.
Heck, I've seen idiots TEXTING on their cell phones while driving and they were all over the damned road. Either there is an awful lot of mid day drunk-ons around here, or it is merely the incidence of cell phone distractions while driving has greatly increased. I have been behind cars where it was obvious the driver was searching around for their cell phone, even trying to look under the PASSENGER seat while driving down the road! I could PLAINLY see this through the back window of the vehicles. Matter of fact, I would have to say that drivers impaired by using their cell phones while driving are just as much of a danger, if not more so, than drivers impaired by consuming alcohol, simply because of the greater prevalence of this problem. The later is dangerous because alcohol impairs judgement and concentration. The former is dangerous because cell phones impair attention and concentration (as well as judgement, in that only a damned fool would do stunts like mentioned above searching for their cell phone).

And you have NO idea how much it tweaks my butt to have to think that it would be highly hypocritical of me to say on one hand that drivers shouldn't be pulled from their cars and FORCED to have blood tests undertaken alongside the road for the sake of safety, but then on the other hand to make a statement that using cell phones in a moving automobile should be banned for safety reasons.... But I sure can THINK it...
__________________
Rich Z is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 01-01-2011, 11:59 PM   #7
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

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob K View Post
I guess I don't understand what you're saying so I'm going to disagree for now.

If you're on duty and pull over a suspected intoxicated driver don't you tell them they have to take a breathalyzer test? If they refuse don't you take them to jail? And then to court? See where I'm going with this?

Looks to me like they're just expediting the process.
Scenario: On duty officer observes a "suspected" impaired driver.
Establishes enough PC to effect a traffic stop.

Fast forward....Standard questions, blah blah blah...SFT's...fails.

You request that they submit to an approved test for intoxication.
They refuse.
You advise them that they have no right to refuse and that thier driving priviledge will be suspended as a result of said failure.
They again refuse.

Assuming you have enough at this point, arrest, charge, issue another citation for failure to submit, take DL.

Blood draw is not allowed in less than a fatality or serious injury crash.
They still have the right not to incriminate themselves and we still do not have the right to force a blood draw (effectively a search).

Where law enforcement and the courts are attempting to subvert the issues, is by having a judge on scene to witness the events, establish PC, and sign a "search warrant" for the blood.

I don't like the smell of this, and it still violates a citizens right against self incrimination.

Searches and the warrants required, were meant for criminal cases, not criminal traffic!

Clearer now?
__________________

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
Unread 01-02-2011, 12:00 AM   #8
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

To clarify, "Technically" they're probably right by doing it this way.
Procedurally, it's gray.
Constitutionally, I think it circumvents the intent.
And overall, sets a terrible precedent for future intrusions into your life.
__________________

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
Unread 01-02-2011, 12:14 AM   #9
Bob K
Deceased
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Sunshine State
Posts: 1,268
Name : Bob Korreck
Bob K has disabled reputation
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow View Post
Blood draw is not allowed in less than a fatality or serious injury crash.
They still have the right not to incriminate themselves and we still do not have the right to force a blood draw (effectively a search).
Clearer now?
You're so smart.

Yes, it's clear now and I appreciate the lesson. I thought a person had to submit to a blood test but in fact they're rewriting the rule book or I should say trying to rewrite the rule book. I could look into this further but I won't.

I think what irritated me the most about this thread is that I read attorneys specialize in defending DUI. I guess it's just a personal problem.
Bob K is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 01-02-2011, 12:21 AM   #10
Bob K
Deceased
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Sunshine State
Posts: 1,268
Name : Bob Korreck
Bob K has disabled reputation
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow View Post
And overall, sets a terrible precedent for future intrusions into your life.
I think we all understand that part. Every day we just keep getting more crap forced on us and we'll never see the end of that. We could go several hours on this subject. I need to hit the sack.

Thanks bud.
Bob K is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Possible body scan protest could clog airport checkpoints in South Florida, elsewhere RSS Feed Florida News Feeds 0 11-16-2010 03:46 PM
Dui And Traffic Safety Checkpoints Across South Florida Friday RSS Feed Florida News Feeds 0 03-19-2010 07:54 AM
Dui And Traffic Safety Checkpoints Across South Florida Friday RSS Feed Florida News Feeds 0 03-19-2010 07:54 AM
"No Sex Since 1955" RSS Feed Just For Laughs! 0 04-26-2009 02:11 AM
FHP checkpoints planned in four North Florida counties RSS Feed Florida News Feeds 0 12-11-2008 02:23 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:02 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Page generated in 0.04609108 seconds with 11 queries
All material copyrighted by CorvetteFlorida.com and
the respective owners of the material posted.