Motorists Forced To Let Officers Draw Blood Samples At DUI Stops
October 16th, 2007 Posted in DUI/DWI
There have been an increasing number of police departments allowing their officers to draw blood samples from motorists under suspicion of a DUI/DWI. This takes place on the roadside as opposed to a hospital where there are trained medical professionals. It seems like a recipe for disaster to allow officers to do blood draws when they do not have adequate medical training. This has proven true in Arizona recently where a lawsuit has been filed to stop this practice.
According to Scripps News, a man developed a persistent infection at the site of a blood draw administered by a Pima County sheriff’s deputy. He has filed what is believed to be the first claim in Arizona against the practice, which could put local taxpayers on the hook for any damages.
Arizona law requires that drunken driving suspects submit to a test or lose their license for a year and it’s the officer’s choice, not the driver’s, whether to use a breath or a blood test.
Having officers draw blood has become more common recently because it makes it more difficult for people to defend themselves against DUI/DWI charges. Breathalyzers have proven to be wildly inaccurate and don’t hold up well in court so blood tests have become a more appealing option legally. But when dealing with a medical procedure like a blood draw, the focus should be on the well-being of the individual and not making sure the District Attorney can get a conviction. Officers without adequate medical training should not be playing around with people’s health, no matter the legal ramifications.
Other Interesting Articles
76 Responses to “Motorists Forced To Let Officers Draw Blood Samples At DUI Stops”
By Douglas on Oct 16, 2007
I am not a certified medical professional, but I have had some interaction with the field. I for one, am deeply concerned over this practice. True, you can do a blood draw in not quite sterile conditions, but it is a very risky situation no matter how you look at it. There is also the other concern of making a good draw. I am a rather large individual, and I can tell you that to get an promising draw, you have to utilize a rather fine needle, because my veins are extremely had to hit. I have been disallowed to donate blood due to my veins. The thought that an untrained individual could take a large gauge needle to my arm scares me. The chance for infection is high, but also there is the chance for damage due to the needle.
By Evan on Oct 16, 2007
What happens when an individual, even a sober one, has a fear of needles? Many people have a paralyzing fear of needles and, despite being perfectly sober, would refuse a blood draw out of pure panic, regardless of the potential consequences. Presumably, the officer could demand a blood draw instead of the breathalyser, an innocent suspect could refuse and lose his or her license automatically simply for refusing under duress. Of course, the suspect could tell the story to the judge, who may or may not believe it. If the officer gives in and allows the breathalyser instead of the blood draw, then smart suspects will claim a fear of needles to gain the advantage of a breathalyser test that is vulnerable in court. If the judge allows the license suspension to stand, then the citizens are compelled to submit to a risky and invasive medical procedure performed by inadequately trained law enforcement or else lose a freedom that has become essential in the modern world. It is an impossible situation but we live in a country where the presumption must be in favor of individual freedoms and there is no freedom more important than the freedom to be free from intrusions upon our person without due process. These blood draws are grossly inappropriate.
By William Bennet on Oct 16, 2007
Amazing. This is clearly medical malpractice. If I started drawing blood in this manner, even with good intentions, I would be arrested.
How do they handle the large number of people who have religious objections to the vampiric drawing of their blood for non-medical purposes? Are they simply not allowed to drive because of their religious beliefs in Arizona?
By Lone Individual on Oct 16, 2007
This is insane. I thought it was satire when I clicked the link. How is this possible?
By Alex on Oct 17, 2007
Insane. When do the feds come to my house to install cameras and bugs so they can watch and listen?
By Me on Oct 17, 2007
Holy f#@$ing Christ almighty… this hasn’t made national news yet?
I hope the person who is suing wins in the multiples of millions for medical malpractice since LEO are NOT trained medical practitioners and should not be drawing blood.
Moreso is the absolute gross violation of civil rights. What sort of fascist country have we become? Jesus H. F#@$ing Christ
By Edward McCain on Oct 17, 2007
Refuse the needle, and if they stick you anyway, charge the officer with assult.
And by the way, since when can’t cops be tried in civil court? If people pressed suit against bad cops, or even good cops following bad orders, I’d wager that law enforcement would become a lot more polite.
By elissaF on Oct 17, 2007
I’m more concerned about the safety of the community than of any one member of the community. To this end, police should be well-trained in using the needles, however, the goal is to get unsafe drivers off the roads.
By JD on Oct 17, 2007
Welcome to the soon to be facist America…
By Marc Varner on Oct 17, 2007
Perhaps the saddest commentary of all on this subject is this. The fact is that this insane, over-reaching, and intrusive violation of individuals rights will not stop until the state is sued and is forced to pay a huge sum of taxpayer’s money. People complain that we have too many lawsuits in the country, but this is exactly why that is the case.
If the taxpayers must pay the consequences of such stupid policy, then perhaps they should have been allowed to vote on this as a referendum. I can guarantee this would never have passed and been granted as acceptable if put up or a vote. Don’t misunderstand me, drunk driving is yet another selfish, indulgent act that American’s do which shows no regard or consideration to those around them and if I were King the rule would be simple, Get caught doing it, lose your right to drive for life. However, that cannot turn our country into a police state where enforcement and mere suspicion precede due process. That’s called Russia so if you like that sorta thing, move there
By Debbie on Oct 17, 2007
No amount of medical training of this type is possible for the police forces, drawing blood is a different profession. the police force is having a hard enough time keeping up with the typical police work. Drawing blood is dangerous and invasive. What pissed off cop is going to care about the person he/she wants to draw blood from. The DA just found a way to make more money, by winning cases that the tax payers will have to finance. DAs will do anything to win cases….framing people, go after easy targets like nieve young folks, frame the victim, now draw blood.
By Marc Varner on Oct 17, 2007
ElissaF
From Civics 101 - That’s called Socialism and there is an Air France flight leaving for Paris in 15 minutes that would put you in that environment. We are all on a slippery slope when we start doing things “for the good of the community”. That is idealist language and reasoning that when expanded can justify almost any number of intrusions that police, politicians, etc can roll out under the banner of “For the good of the masses”. Not trying to say we are there - yet - but I will point out that the selling of such philosophies is how most Dictator’s or oppressive governments came to power and convinced a population that their actions were “in the best interest of their countrymen” I’ll remind you that our country was formed to flee exactly such repression from a Monarchy, which is why we formed a Republic.
By Riplakish on Oct 17, 2007
Might be time to push the right of self locomotion a little harder.
By Loren on Oct 17, 2007
If it’s all about safety, then the cops shouldn’t be at all hesitant to reciprocate. If the cop won’t submit to a blood test to prove his soberness I’m not about to let him stick me on the same grounds.
By Me on Oct 17, 2007
Community good? COMMUNITY GOOD?
Giving police the right to stick an average citizen with a needle is NOT community good.
To the person who said we’re becoming a fascist state… that’s like the frog thinking the bubbling water is starting to feel warm.
By Don't Drink and Drive on Oct 17, 2007
If you drink and drive, you face the consequences. I think they should be able to do this to get the conviction. Keep the drunks off the streets and get them convicted.
By Ugly American on Oct 17, 2007
“Amendment 4
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
In other words, they need an order issued by a judge. I don’t care what some paper pushing closet fascist says - until the US Constitution is amended the cops who do this and anyone who supports them are breaking the law.
Also, practicing medicine without a medical licence is a felony in every state.
By Douglas Guerra on Oct 17, 2007
Hey Marc. I appreciate your outrage about this practice however you´re a bit off the mark when you say the French and Russians are subject to these practices. Driving in France is bad but no one in that country would put up with this. I´m not sure about the former Soviet Union but a neighbor of mine, a recent former resident of Russia, could hardly believe this was happening in ANY country. When it comes to traffic enforcement, it´s too bad the US has become the same type of oppresive dictatorship from which it was supposedly protecting its citizens.
By Stephanie Bond on Oct 17, 2007
Are you kidding me? I would cheerfully lose my license for a year rather than allow some macho, marginally trained peace office to stick a needle in my arm. After they take your blood they now have a sample of your DNA. It sounds to me like a “slick” way to build a DNA bank of “problem” people. What’s next? Taking blood samples of everyone as they’re born and building a DNA database? Anyone who thinks they live in a free country put your arm in the air and wave it around!!!
By Jim Walker on Oct 17, 2007
I lived and worked in Moscow, Russia from late 1991 to early 1994, as the first General Director of the first Chevrolet dealership in the former Soviet Union. Russian traffic police, the G.A.I. (guy-eee), had the right to take blood samples at the side of the road and the legal alcohol tolerance level for drivers was ZERO. Smart people carried their own sealed and sterilized needles in case that happened to them. Smarter people (including me)learned where the GAI tended to have their traps and took other routes. I was never stopped for suspected DUI, though I often drove after having some wine with dinner and having a likely BAC of .02 to .06.
By wardoc on Oct 18, 2007
I am a physician, with experience in ERs, hostpials and private clinic practice. We have RNs, that means REGISTERED NURSES, who draw blood, or, alternatively, Certified Medical Technologists, or Certified Phlebotomists, depending on the setting. No where in medicine does a non certified goon draw blood or even touch patients.
To let a thug cop with an average IQ of 89, an authoritarian/schizotypal personality profile, and NO experience in health care, draw blood is moronic at best. I just wonder what makes these goons think they have the skill to do a blood draw; just because they can beat an innocent person until they bleed doesn’t mean they can draw blood medicinally.
Just remember, without the POLICE, you can’t have a POLICE STATE. Everyone needs to remember that when TSHTF.
wardoc
By Billinaz on Oct 18, 2007
Well, Doctor (probably a Doctor of Philosophy) before you start slinging phrases like thug and assert others IQ level maybe you should check your own.
Officers have been drawing blood after the sucessful completion of the phelebotomy course for several years now. I would bet they are much more proficient than any Doctor out there.
As for those who say they would just loose their license, after you are served with the license suspension comes an applicaiton to a Judge via fax for a search warrant. If it is granted and served to you then you no longer can refuse.
Continue to refuse and you will be strapped into a restraint chair and the blood draw will be done then.
A one year license suspension and a DUI conviction is usually the result on those cases.
By wardoc on Oct 18, 2007
MD, FYI; you’re obviously a thug cop or a family member of a thug cop. WTSHTF, you will be remembered by those you know and abuse, I’m sure. BTW; can you cite the 4th Amendment, or, can you even tell me what its about? Or, do you even know about these Amendments that supposedly protect citizens. Of course you don’t, THUG. Read the Bill of Rights before you shoot your mouth off.
By Texas Rebel on Oct 18, 2007
Are we “The People” going to put up with this draconian police state crap? Just resist and say hell NO!! So what if you are arrested? Sue their arse for your civil rights being violated! Call you State Reps. & Senators and demand that they rescind this law!!
Then join the Ron Paul American revolution to resist this type of government nation wide in 2008. http://www.ronpaul2008.com
Read this:
http://www.patrickruffini.com/2007/10/15/inside-ron-paul-nation/
By Metroplexual on Oct 18, 2007
What happens when the cops accidentally stick themselves afterward which happens to doctors and nurses on occasion with sober patients? You are talking about blood draws in the field from people displaying signs of drinking and moving around.
They would have to get permission from the donor to check for Hepatitis or god forbid HIV. If it were me getting blood drawn I would tell the cop to stick it.
By Tac-Medic on Oct 18, 2007
hey guys, quit the cop-bashing. (sorry, im biased, ive been on the FBI hostage rescue team for 5 years) but it should be obvious that letting untrained cops draw blood is a horrible idea! I have had to draw blood from suspected DUI perps, and FYI its not easy. I think drawing blood in the field should be restricted to tactical medics and paramedics and THATS IT!
By Dave on Oct 19, 2007
What was wrong with the brethalyzer? Seemed to do the trick.
By Linda on Oct 20, 2007
I would never let a police officer draw blood for one a person does not know if they are certified to do this and also there should be no reason that you could not have a hospital do this. I think the people of that state need to stand up and demand this be stopped!
By blake on Oct 22, 2007
I would sue instantly if this was attempted to be forced on me!!!!!!!!!!
By mike-11 on Oct 22, 2007
tell them you have aids and see
how quick they give you a
breathalizer instead-keep telling
them be careful i have aids-dont
stick yourself-why are you shaking?
By Allan Camper on Oct 23, 2007
WAKE UP AMERICA! What is it going to take for true americans to wake up and take back control of our country. CHANGES NEED TO BE MADE.
By ABC on Oct 23, 2007
Don’t Drink and Drive This person is the type that has gotten this country in the mess we are today! Obviously mentaly unstable and poorly educated. You are not able to make rational decisions or use lodgic and common sence to make realistic coments or decisions. Pull your head out of your A$$ and look around!
By Tim on Oct 23, 2007
I am a phlebotomist, and was required to complete a three month training program before being allowed to collect blood samples without supervision. I highly doubt that these law enforcement officers are given even close to what is normally required of a phlebotomist.
I am very interested in knowing exactly how much training these officers must have before being sent out to collect blood samples.
By Tom on Oct 24, 2007
Do they use an alcohol swab on the stick site before they draw? Do they sneak a quick swipe of alcohol from the swab on and IN the needle before they stick? Instant high blood alcohol reading! The very same no morals, no scruples gestapo who figured out how to get trees to register 40 mph on radar will have no problem figuring out how to rig a blood/alchohol test. Try to prove your innocence when you’re presumed guilty until proven innocent. George Orwell was a prophet.
By April on Oct 26, 2007
I have read the article about officers drawing blood from suspected DUI drivers and the 35 responses. The general consensus seems to be that most people think that untrained people drawing blood from others is a dangerous (if not downright stupid) idea.
I’m glad I’m not the only one who thinks that only those trained to perform venipuncture(the act of drawing blood) should be allowed to do so. My sister, without any measurable skill or a doctor’s permission, drew my father’s blood. My sister’s action freaked me out as I saw it as an act of abuse. I am sure that my father did not give informed consent, as I believe he is afraid of her. I reported her to two different health-type boards in her state and neither one found her guilty of wrongdoing. I, of course, am stunned at the Boards’ feckless responses.
I recognize that my situation is not about police officers taking blood, but as I said in the beginning, I am relieved to see that public consensus seems to be that untrained, non-medical personnel (whether they are police officers or deranged people like my sister) should not be drawing blood.
By aNurse on Nov 2, 2007
This is ridiculous. If a cop says he wants to take my blood, I’ll just offer to give him a urine sample instead. Which shoe, pig?
By Galen_Cop on Nov 3, 2007
Damn, aNures
What’s with all the cop hatred?
As a police officer, I don’t care who is telling me to draw blood or what kind of training they give me, I will not draw blood on a suspect; just sounds wrong to me, and I would not feel comfortable doing it! I have not heard of this in Illinois yet, and I hope that I don’t.
But it Sounds like the law had to be applied to you at some point, aNurse, maybe a little salty about the DUI you received? People love the law, until it is applied to them.
Chill out!
~Galen
By Mr.Dana Fogg on Nov 4, 2007
I am highly against drinking and driving,but there is no reason what so ever that a person that is not medically trained and licensed to draw blood from a person should be allowed to do it.
By DE DE MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIST on Nov 6, 2007
It is very possible to introduce bacteria into the site where blood is drawn if not using sterile procedure..and since we can have mrsa on our skin it is even more scary. We need to stand up for our rights or soon we will not have any. Also it the blood is not drawn and the tubes not inverted properly the blood alchol can be elevated form coagulation and fermentation….think about that……
By Matt on Nov 12, 2007
Just tell the officer you have AIDS and he’s putting himself at risk.
See if he offers you the breathalyser then.
By Bruce on Nov 12, 2007
To ~Galen, who wrote “People love the law, until it is applied to them.”
Wrong. I have been charged with no crime in the last 35 years, certainly never one involving DUI, and never convicted of any criminal offense or misdemeanor other than for failure to contest traffic and/or parking tickets. But I do not love the law when it is abused, regardless of whom the victim of such abuse is.
Based solely on your post in this thread, I could allege that it appears to me that you are exactly the type of L.E.O. who abuses such power, and that to the extent that you feel justified in your absolute power, you have already been absolutely corrupted. Were I to make such unfounded allegations, would you not feel unjustly categorized?
Five percent of the public at large may be criminally inclined, but if the figure is really that high, it is probably that high for police as well. The badge does not make you perfect. It does not enhance your judgment, or make you the only person who can know the truth in any given situation. It does not make you a reliable judge of character based on the writings of people who disagree with you in this forum. It does not make you qualified to drive safely while disobeying the same traffic laws your subjects must obey, just as it does not qualify you to draw blood with or without consent of subjects. What the badge is supposed to do is to remind you that your power must be exercised with great responsibility.
Yes, obviously, aNurse’s remarks were inflammatory. So were yours. You are supposed to know better, and rise above such baiting. If you are not comfortable with that, your discomfort becomes cause for my concern. Illinois already has a reputation for its death-row of DNA-exonerated people wrongly convicted by a very efficient system of injustice.
By Officer Josh on Nov 18, 2007
Ha ha this is great i mean people love the police until they get in trouble. I dont totally like the idea of drawing blood myself nor does my state do it but i have a friend that his state does and he must go through a class tought by nurses and must pass a written and practical exam. People just dont have respect for police and the laws are geared for the violator and not the police i mean alot of cops are afraid to do there job since we can now get sued so easily. I was stationed in germany when i was in the military and the german police didnt play i mean they would beat you down infront of everyone if you were out of line. I mean no one messed with the cops there b/c there was still fear and respect. there is no fear and respect in the U.S. for cops and this is a big problem. Honestly in germany they take your blood right there when they pull you over. We were briefed that if we did get pulled over that it would be a good idea to give blood if they ask because they would litterally beat it out of you if you refuse. Thats the truth no exageration on that. All im saying is give us our police powers back!
By André Heinreich on Nov 22, 2007
Officer Josh, your statements about German law are incorrect. A driver suspected of drinking under the influence is required to take a blood test administered by a doctor working for the Polizei department. It is NOT administered by an officer on site. At the arrest time, the driver is given a breathalyzer.
By Liz from Ohio on Nov 27, 2007
Well Officer, handcuff me,it won’t be the first time I”ve worn them. Though I’ll admit before it was for umm…fun.
By Hubcap on Nov 30, 2007
Officer Josh complains that “there is no fear and respect in the U.S. for cops and this is a big problem.”
No, you are the problem. It must be nice to have a job if someone pisses you off you can just beat the shit out of them and know you will never face any consequences, except for maybe a few days of “administrative leave”.
And you want even more power? Dude, don’t worry about people not fearing the police, you are one scary motherfucker.
Why should anyone respect you? Because you have a gun? You are simply an instrument of excessive government power run amuck.
You are a perfect example of why it is no longer enough in this country to just question authority. Authority must be mocked, ignored and ultimately destroyed.
If you want more power, why don’t you move to Saudi Arabia? You would probably fit right in with their Religious Police. There you can put the beat down on someone for not being dressed properly or listening to the wrong music. Allah will love you for it.
By mack` on Dec 1, 2007
I thought breathalizers were good enough for life imprisonment, or they are for the campus police(Highway Patrol) in Waco. Look who showed up to enforce this: George Bush waiting on DPS and Baylor Bigot Judges.
You should stick to trying to erase DPS forever records for these eroneous traffic stops and enfiringments. They trash them after 3 years anyway.
Now we have Highway Patrol as lobbyist and pretend Sheriffs and you never see them on the interstate anymore.
By Officer Josh on Dec 1, 2007
Hubcap,
Haha your hilarious man first of all im not going to just beat someone down for pissing me off, and dont say we wont get caught cuz ive seen alot that have and get in alot of trouble. You sound like an Anarchist “You are a perfect example of why it is no longer enough in this country to just question authority. Authority must be mocked, ignored and ultimately destroyed”. no law and order and if you delt with the people i deal with on a regular basis you would change your tune. To the normal somewhat law obiding citizen we are too rough or too intimidating but if you delt with the scum of the earth day in and day out you would approach situations on a more dominant or aggressive level. Why? cuz you have to, if you show fear or compation at first you will get hurt and/or die. when you approach a situation you have to establish your dominance or you will get taken advantage of…..Anyway im off track. Back to the rediculousness. I see what your saying some police give us a bad name but its not the majority but i cant tell you that b/c your only 1 sided. I’m not saying i should be able to beat people down at will (although it would be nice at times…lol.) but that if i say hey dont this or that…you should NOT DO THAT instead of saying F..U cop/pig…or whatever. If say get off the corner GET OFF THE CORNER dont make me make you get off the corner. Maybe you live in a suburb or small town so you dont understand i dont know but its fun chating about things with you,lol.
By Officer Josh on Dec 1, 2007
Anyway guys were off the subject, i actually agree that we shouldnt be able to draw blood at the time of the stop. Personally i dont want to, too many issues tha could accur.
By LawStudent10 on Dec 2, 2007
I read through all of the e-mails/ comments and am currently writing a memo on this subject. What I want to know is where in the law gives officers the right? Not being sarcastic at all. What statute will I find this under? I need something in black and white that tells me Officers have the right to administer a blood test and if someone does not submit their license is taken away for one year, I also would like to know whether or not you have to be placed under arrest before the blood test and if there needs to be probable cause or exigent circumstances for an officer to do this? Anyone that can answer this for me or point me in the right direction would be appreciated very much.
The whole thing just seems WRONG?
The Fourth Amendment does say “persons” I would assume that blood is part of your person right?
By LawStudent10 on Dec 2, 2007
The Fourth Amendment:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
By hubcap on Dec 2, 2007
LawStudent10
You sound like one of them criminal-coddling lawyers always talkin’ about “rights” and the Con-sty-tu-shun. Look, if Officer Josh says you need to be searched, then you need to be searched. How else is he gonna know what to arrest you for? Judges playing Monday morning quarterback second guessing the cop on the street is what’s wrong with this country. Now get your papers in order before Officer Josh tazes your ass.
Disclaimer: That was satire.
By hubcap on Dec 2, 2007
Seriously LawStudent10, I’ve always wondered about that in regard to implied consent laws. A breathalyzer is forcing me though the coercion of losing my license to perform an act the express purpose of which is to provide evidence against myself. Sounds like a pretty clear-cut 5th Amendment violation.
A blood draw on the other hand, even though it falls under the same implied consent laws, is more of an intrusive search of one’s person and requires only passive participation of the person. So it looks like the 4th would be more applicable.
I’m not a lawyer; my entire legal education consists of two semesters of business law and a season of Ali McBeal. I’m just spouting my opinion.
By Officer Josh on Dec 2, 2007
Actually the black and white part you looking for lawstudent 10 varies state by state. I dont know what states do it but ive heard that some do. Also you can refuse a blood test or breathalizer if you want to that is completely in your right. Honestly and here’s a good hint for you drunk drivers; if you get pulled over and you think your gonna fail the breathalizer test, refuse it. It automatically admitts your guilty but its harder to prove in court that you were drunk, bottom line it might get you a better sentence. If i got pulled over and i knew i would fail i would refuse and hope for the best with the judge.
Also for the blood test question by lawstudent10 about probable cause. You are usually under arrest by the time you take the blood test b/c you most likely already failed the breathalizer. The blood test is done after to basically back up the evidence. The probable cause is easily done by whatever reason you pulled the person over. I mean there are alot of test performed b4 we do the breathalizer. We must build up the probable cause b4 we breathalize you ie: field sobriety test and prerequisite measures, talking to you all these are used against you in court.
By Matt Duke on Dec 17, 2007
I would let the cop draw my blood, then contest the evidence as being tainted by the alcohol swabbing procedure. Then I would sue the city and make $50k. So no DUI, and some extra $$ in my pocket. Sounds like a good night out drinking to me!
By Learn the Facts, on Dec 20, 2007
Arizona makes 1000 DUI arrests a month. Out of those people that are arrested, many are consuming alcohol and using marijuana. The Breath Analyzer only detects alcohol level content and DOES NOT detect drug use. It isn’t the Police Officer drawing blood on the susptected DUI driver at the scene, it is a trained and licensed Paramedic citizen. If you refuse drawing blood at the scene; they will allow you to have it drawn at the Police Station or hospital. It will take approximately three - five days to receive your blood results back. The Phoenix Police Department will be hiring additional Manpower and Toxiocologists for the new DUI Task Force.
Did you know that 80% of those people using marijuana and consuming alcohol kill “innocent lives”.
Aren’t you tired of having those people make the choice to drive drunk; killing or causing car accidents for innocent people. (I know I am). It’s time to make the choices for those that think they can drive drunk. We have a lot cleaning up ahead of us.
By Hubcap on Dec 20, 2007
If AZ makes 1000 DUI arrests, I would bloody well hope that ALL–not many–are consuming alcohol.
You mention pot. Fact is that a British tv reporter did a test not too long ago that showed a person actually performed better in a controlled driving test AFTER smoking marijuana, than they did straight.
And then you try to tell me that 80% of the people who mix weed and booze cause fatal accidents?! At that rate it would take about a week and a half to eliminate all the stoners in the state. Methinks you are the one smoking too much.
By James Young on Dec 20, 2007
Learn the Facts writes: {Did you know that 80% of those people using marijuana and consuming alcohol kill “innocent lives”. }
Hmmm. Since 20 million Americans have tried marijuana within the last year and 80% of them have killed “innocent lives” — we’re ignoring the guilty people that they have killed for the moment – that means that some 16 million people have killed at least one innocent each. This must come as a terrible shock to demographers who study mortality since it is nearly 1,000 times the number of total homicides in a given year.
I believe you need to revisit wherever you got those assertions.
By Charlie on Jan 15, 2008
My name is Charlie, and 1st off I’m not any police hater, considering I’m a retired Chicago Homicide detective, now living in Arizona.
I was stopped on Memorial Day weekend last year and the officers who were working their day off on a DUI task force stopped for an improper turn at a street light.
I immediately identified myself as a retired officer (since I carry a concealed weapon, as per federal law) when the officer wanted me to do some balancing act of standing on one foot with my hands in front of me, and then bend halfway down to the ground I just laughed at him, I’m 62 yrs. old, 80 lbs overweight and have bad knees and ankles.
I explained that I physically couldnt do what he requested and probably haven’t been for the last 25 years. His response was to throw the handcuffs on me, and then throw me head first into the back of an unpadded step van they use for transport.
So much for professional courtesy, or even common sense, how many officers have ever been attacked by retired P.O.s ???
If the federal government has enough respect for retired officers that they passed a law so we can continue to carry our weapons for protection, I would at least expect the same courtesy for a fellow officer, I got none.
Well the long and the short of it is the officer went and got a warrant (took him 4 hours), came back, and to my amazement, personally took my blood (in Chicago any taking of blood, breath, or DNA evidence from a suspect must be done by a third party to avoid conflict of interest).
I was then given all my stuff back, no ticket, no summons, nothing, 6 months later I get a summons for a DMV hearing to suspend my license for failing to take the breath, that case was dismissed.
Now, a few days ago, I get notified by my attorney that they are now filing DUI charges against me, 8 months later, what kind of nonsense is this, it doesn’t take 8 months to process the blood, it takes on about 3 weeks, something stinks here!
The police out here (Arizona)are not like the ones in Chicago, they all act like automaton Robo-Cops, and common sense and compassion doesn’t seem to be in their training.
Sorry to say, but if I was driving by and saw a couple of these officers getting their asses kicked, I would have think twice about pulling my pistol and coming to their aide, on second thought, I would come to thier aide, because it is ingrained in my soul to be the “Police”, which I guess they will never understand.
By Steve1776 on Jan 20, 2008
Officer Josh: Thinking that people should be scared of the cops is BS.
Charlie: Welcome to the club.Us citizens consider “Professional Courtesy” to be a double standard.
Tac-Medic: You don’t want to know what I think of the HRT and the FBI after the children they killed at Waco.
A cop, judge, or lawyer will NEVER take a DUI test. You may loose your license for a while, but if you get a DUI you’re going to loose it anyway. This way you don’t have a record for DUI and you get your license back just as quick or sooner.
By Officer Josh on Jan 27, 2008
I never stated we should be feared only respected.
Charlie what happend to you is BS i would of never done that to a retired officer, some states are messed up.
By billmtx on Feb 8, 2008
This is amazing to me that some untrained person be allowed to draw Blood from a person that is according to the Law is “presummed innocent”. The first time I heard about this practice I was very Upset that this be allowed. I think everyone should get a copy of the US Constitution and prepare themselves for any such situation, like this one, against all inappropriate practices that the “Authorities” may use on the Public. Another point, Please Please report this to the FDA. I am sure they would want to know about this… We can’t fight City Hall….but the Federal Government can. Our Civil Liberties must be upheld… and not be bullied by Overzealous Authorites playing Politics or Self Serving Motivations.
By Joe on Feb 18, 2008
Well Charlie, even if your a former PO I wouldn’t wish that treatment on anybody. But it may serve a purpose in that you now know how many of us normal citizens can be treated. And you don’t need to be drunk anymore to experience this treatment. See; http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/21/2101.asp and http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/20/2067.asp
It shouldn’t make any difference regardless if you a PO or not. No citizens deserves to be treated that way. It’s another reason police are so resented in some circles. Some police officers are just plain mean spirited. As long as things are peaceful there’s no reason for anybody to be roughed up. You might expect that in a third world country but not in the good ‘ole USA. My biggest beef is that there never seems to be anyway to get rid of the bad officers except in extreme cases.
By the curmudgeon on Feb 26, 2008
“I was stationed in germany when i was in the military and the german police didnt play i mean they would beat you down infront of everyone if you were out of line. I mean no one messed with the cops there b/c there was still fear and respect”
Did you sleep through history class, or what?
Let me clue you in…Germany…two World Wars…millions of people killed…untold damage to the environment…ramifications still being dealt with even today, nearly 70 years after the last one.
And you respect their system?
By Mike on Mar 15, 2008
This is a joke, right? Drawing blood on the side of the road?
This HAS to be a joke.
By yes its true on Apr 23, 2008
i was pulled over for speeding, in texas. the state trooper, said he smelled marijauna, I then had to exit the vehicle. After being put through all six tests, the officer,stated that, i had hesitated one second, on my turn, and that my eye twitched. i was arrested, and given the choice, of either take the blood test, or lose my license, right then. i chose to not take the blood test. i for one dont want my blood being tested, when a cop, is just out for a dwi arrest. In texas, state troopers, are rewarded for the actual arrest, not any ensuing conviction. quite simply, because the officer said he smelled pot, but FOUND NOTHING, ON MYSELF, OR MY VEHICLE.
There is no middle ground here, you can object however you want, for whatever reason you want, if you refuse the blood test, it will cost you, a dwi arrest, a night in jail, and roughly three thousand dollars, to fight and beat the criminal charge. that was very cheap, by the way. So take heed. even if the actual dwi case is dismissed, you will still lose your license, for a minimum of eight months. period, if you live in texas. It is purely about the money, and the revenue from these cases, that matter to the state, not your rights
By Vampiress on Apr 24, 2008
I’m a certified medical phlebotomist and I do blood draws all day long. Drawing blood is an aquired skill that takes alot of practice. I wonder how many times the officer is allowed to stick before they give up? If they clean the site with alchohol and it does not dry COMPLETELY, it will alter test results. In fact, at the hospital where I work, if we have orders to do a coma panel, we don’t clean the site at all for fear of altering test results.
How about those individuals who cannot have blood drawn for various reasons including a mastectomy or fistulas??? This could lead to some serious complications!! If they want to draw blood, they should be properly trained to do so. Even nurses and doctors have problems drawing blood. I say leave it to us vampires. The police should just bring the person to the hospital and have the blood drawn there.
Don’t forget, the police officer is also in danger when drawing blood, especially from an intoxicated person. We Phlebos usually help each other out in those situations (holding arms for each other) as there is a high risk of being poked. I wonder also about the equipment supplied to the officers…….if they only have large gage needles. Some people need tiny needles ( butterfly system ) or the site may need to be pre-warmed. Sometimes we have to draw from a foot because no other site is suitable. Anyhow, seems too complicated and risky for both police and the citizen.
By clarence on Apr 28, 2008
I really wonder if a cop would let an average person draw blood them i don’t think so. So why should we let them do it to us?