PublicRadar.Com

Blood Tests and Alcohol Checkpoints

June 2nd, 2008 Justin Posted in Travel |

In the past, some states have allowed drivers to refuse a field sobriety test. However, police are starting to trump the refusals. Police are now obtaining warrants to draw a drivers blood, in order to determine if they are under the influence.

Even if the warrant is not obtained properly, there is no time to argue the case, until after your blood has been drawn and you go to court:

Do you have the right to refuse a blood test at a DWI stop? Not if the cop has a properly obtained warrant to draw your blood which he went back to his car and obtained from an on-call magistrate. In fact, even if the warrant was improperly obtained, the cop is taking that blood and you can argue about whether the warrant was properly obtained in a suppression hearing or on appeal after your conviction. Welcome to the “no refusal” policy being instituted by an ever increasing number of law enforcement agencies.

Link

In all honesty, I think this is a fantastic idea. There are people who put alcohol in their system and then make the stupid decision to drive. By refusing a field sobriety test, some drivers have been able to lower their blood alcohol concentration in the time between the field test and the test back at the station. The result is that they are able to get out of a DUI or a DWI.

This is the perfect solution. Warrants are near impossible to get around and they are quite easy for a police officer to obtain; with probable cause. The warrant allows the officer to get the evidence needed to ticket the driver. Hopefully this will make people think twice about going out without a designated driver — and if not, at least they will get a ticket.

The main issue is that people are saying this violates their constitutional rights. What do you think? Does a warrant for your blood violate your constitutional rights? I am interested in seeing what you think.

Justin