you have to be s#iting me

[S107]

Originally Posted by Czolgosz

Some people while intoxicated still drive perfectly fine. How 'bout we end the effing checkpoints and have cops actually pull people over who drive dangerously.

It's kinda like the cell phone shit. Yeah there are people who completely suck ass at driving w/ a cell phone in their hands, other people (like myself) drive perfectly fine.

Instead of yet another blanket law to restrict everybody because of a few dipshits how 'bout if we actually pull people over that can't drive? What a fucking concept.

I Always Laugh When I See 15+ Cops At A Checkpoint On ONE Street With Only About 3-4 Actually Doing Anything. All Those Extra Mofos As (Stated Above) Should Be Out Looking For The Drunk Drivers. Makes No Sense.

[PhilB]

Originally Posted by kneedraggin650s

I didn't say I agreed with it, but being stopped and going through SFST's and ACTUALLY being taken to the station for a breath test are two different things. But the simple fact remains, if you don't drink and drive, you have nothing to fear. You will pass the tests, and be sent on your way.

Yeah, of course. Why get upset about any overstepping of bounds or violation of rights? If you're innocent you have nothing to fear.

PhilB

[Unbridled Rage]

DUI checkpoints clog roads like political correctness clogs the mind.

As stated by Czolgosz, the police should actually be spending their time and attention stopping people who are causing hazards, drunken or not. This would include left lane camping and yapping cell phone bitches.

They'll get their blood sample from me off the pavement, after they perform a 6-on-one beatdown on me after I tell them what I think of them, their profession, their ancestry, and the circumstances of their birth.

[ZxHunteR]

Originally Posted by dennisred69

"Hey are you a trained medical professorial"

"No but I stayed at a holiday inn express last night....*stab*.....*stab stab*

Hold still you drunk ass....GOSH"

fixed

[cyrilgrey]

Driving back from Boston on I95 in CT I observed an obviously drunk, out of control and dangerous driver traveling 110mph and above. So I followed him. Called the emergency line and told them where we were, what was happening and restated, over and over, how dangerous this person was. Now, I honestly don't care you if you want to do 150mph. In fact, to me that is a perfectly reasonable speed with the right vehicle and conditions, but this guy was running cars out of lanes, swerving and nearly hit dozens of cars as I watched. That was a nice fast transit through the entire state of CT. We ran about 110-125mph the entire way, on the phone the whole time with the state troopers, reporting each exit as we passed them. You'd think eventually a state trooper might show up or something, but apparently not. In fact, the next time you have the urge to drive at top clip through a state, totally blasted I figure the best way not to get caught is to contact 911 and tell them what you're doing.
Anyway, they passed me over to NY 911 when we left the state, I told them to fuck themselves and hung up. CT state is very big on on/off ramp DUI checkpoints.

In a similar vein, when was the last time you saw someone pulled for improper lane change, following too closely, nearly causing accidents and general incompetence? Just doesn't happen here. But, you will get pulled for speed, tinted windows, driving a shiny new car, riding a bike or playing the wrong kind of music.

These DUI checkpoints are another example of sticking your head up your ass and learning to waltz because there's a grease fire on the stove. Our entire planet is populated by morons and I really hope there's an asteroid with our name on it. Preferably the size of Mars.

[Czolgosz]

Originally Posted by cyrilgrey

Driving back from Boston on I95 in CT I observed an obviously drunk, out of control and dangerous driver traveling 110mph and above. So I followed him. Called the emergency line and told them where we were, what was happening and restated, over and over, how dangerous this person was. Now, I honestly don't care you if you want to do 150mph. In fact, to me that is a perfectly reasonable speed with the right vehicle and conditions, but this guy was running cars out of lanes, swerving and nearly hit dozens of cars as I watched. That was a nice fast transit through the entire state of CT. We ran about 110-125mph the entire way, on the phone the whole time with the state troopers, reporting each exit as we passed them. You'd think eventually a state trooper might show up or something, but apparently not. In fact, the next time you have the urge to drive at top clip through a state, totally blasted I figure the best way not to get caught is to contact 911 and tell them what you're doing.
Anyway, they passed me over to NY 911 when we left the state, I told them to fuck themselves and hung up. CT state is very big on on/off ramp DUI checkpoints.

In a similar vein, when was the last time you saw someone pulled for improper lane change, following too closely, nearly causing accidents and general incompetence? Just doesn't happen here. But, you will get pulled for speed, tinted windows, driving a shiny new car, riding a bike or playing the wrong kind of music.

These DUI checkpoints are another example of sticking your head up your ass and learning to waltz because there's a grease fire on the stove. Our entire planet is populated by morons and I really hope there's an asteroid with our name on it. Preferably the size of Mars.

^^^ good shit.

[Thunderace1997]

Originally Posted by 750rider

uhm sorry would have to disagree with you there....
50 DUI cases dropped over improper procedure

test(s) ...yes and why does it now seem to include a non medical proffesional drawing blood ..??
maybe after he just arrested & Handled a cum stained hooker or hobo.. No thanks man.

so your saying all cops are bad because of a couple of dip shits.

EDIT-I dont agree with cops drawing blood. If the person is unconcious due to an accident or drinking to much I have no problem with them going to the hospital (which is where they would go, jail won't take them if they are passed out) to get blood drawn by a nurse or doctor.

[busarider54]

I'm not a big fan of cops drawing blood either. I'm definitely pro-Cop and I don't drink and drive ever. A FST should be enough PC to to take the person to a breath analyzer or hospital for blood draw.

[Aero8]

I don't drive drunk and don't plan to, but this is still wrong. I would not want any officer drawing my blood on the side of a road. If they are that sure that I am drunk they will have plenty of time to get me to a hospital to get blood drawn.

All cops aren't bad, I have met some that are just doing their jobs and doing it well at that, while others are just pulling people over because they can. I don't want some cop on a power trip to start taking my blood because he suspects I am drunk.

I totally agree with the idea of ending this checkpoint bs. Get on the road and actually watch for drivers that are acting like idiots. As someone said, some people can drive perfectly fine while intoxicated, on a cell phone, etc. But it doesn't matter due to blanket rules. Most of the time the cops just sit and wait.

[Parabellum]

OK.

Lets slow down a little and inject some rationality into this discussion.

A few points to note:

1) The article references something happening in ARIZONA ONLY. Arizona has THE harshest traffic, drug, and DUI laws in the entire country. This is something Arizona has been struggling with for a very long time, and I am not surprised to see this crap happening.

2) Most states have laws that prevent an officer from drawing blood. In MOST states you need a court order to obtain blood from a person, as it is considered a complete violation of someone's rights. Hence, these rights can only be superseded when a judge agrees to it.

3) There is NO WAY this practice is going to spread to other states, as it would involve repealing existing laws already on the books AND it would be a political nightmare.


Having said all that: I believe this practice is a complete violation of civil rights, and I would NEVER agree to a roadside blood test, EVEN IF I WAS INNOCENT.

For the officer who posted saying "if you are not guilty, then you have nothing to worry about".

I know the sheeple you pull over may fall for that shit, but most of us are smart enough to know when someone is pissing down our backs and saying that its raining.

Rights are like muscles. Exercise them or they atrophy.

The next time an officer asks one of you "Well, if you have nothing to hide, then why won't you consent to X?" Tell them that exercising your rights under the law is NOT an implication of guilt. It never has been in this country, and it never will be.

[USMCVET]

Having said all that: I believe this practice is a complete violation of civil rights, and I would NEVER agree to a roadside blood test, EVEN IF I WAS INNOCENT.

For the officer who posted saying "if you are not guilty, then you have nothing to worry about".

I know the sheeple you pull over may fall for that shit, but most of us are smart enough to know when someone is pissing down our backs and saying that its raining.

Rights are like muscles. Exercise them or they atrophy.

The next time an officer asks one of you "Well, if you have nothing to hide, then why won't you consent to X?" Tell them that exercising your rights under the law is NOT an implication of guilt. It never has been in this country, and it never will be.

Good stuff. Now, I try to have as little to do w/ cops on the road as possible, if you know what I mean, but I highly doubt that a bunch of traffic cops got together and decided to start drawing blood on the side of the road. The policy makers in that department and in Arizona are the ones to go after here imo.

[Wildheart]

Originally Posted by USMCVET

Good stuff. Now, I try to have as little to do w/ cops on the road as possible, if you know what I mean, but I highly doubt that a bunch of traffic cops got together and decided to start drawing blood on the side of the road. The policy makers in that department and in Arizona are the ones to go after here imo.

This is one of those things you need to take with a grain of salt. Myself, and most Officers I know wouldn't approach this one with a ten foot pole. Med staff at the jail takes care of blood testing in texas. med staff being certified medics.

[BigArn]

Originally Posted by kneedraggin650s

I didn't say I agreed with it, but being stopped and going through SFST's and ACTUALLY being taken to the station for a breath test are two different things. But the simple fact remains, if you don't drink and drive, you have nothing to fear. You will pass the tests, and be sent on your way.

What other or your rights are you willing to give up?

[Parabellum]

This is one of those things you need to take with a grain of salt. Myself, and most Officers I know wouldn't approach this one with a ten foot pole. Med staff at the jail takes care of blood testing in texas. med staff being certified medics.

That is another good point...if I was an officer, NO WAY would I want to be held potentially liable for whatever medical complications might arise from my administering of a road side blood test.

I would bet most cops prefer the breath test, just because it exposes them to much less personal risk also.

It seems that on all sides, the road side blood test is a horrible idea.

[jk750]

As a law enforcement officer, there is no way in hell I'm ever going to draw someone's blood for anything.