The authorities must present evidence to the judge such that the judge finds that there is probable cause.
"Anything that saves lives is a good thing." Wow. Someone's been drinking the DA kool-aid. Then why not install "blow & go's" on all new cars? Why not have checkpoints outside bars? You & your circle of DA's are quite compassionate to just drop every type of sub-.08 case. I can assure you that many of your fellow Harris County DA's do not. You also know damn well that many folks who fall under .08 ARE still arrested by HPD, so even though you might compassionately drop charges eventually, those below the legal limit still face a night in jail and thousands of dollars in legal fees. You think HPD is not incentived, monetarily, to take every damn person they pull over and "suspect" of DWI in? C'mon now, that's how a lot of these guys make their living. Their are HPD guys who make more from OT court appearances than they do in salary. Tell me it's a good system. Now as to those legal fees for which you deride "DWI attorneys" for charging - good DWI attorneys have a MUCH better chance of getting you off than bad ones. Thus they charge more. A DWI conviction, even a first one, can **** you badly. Folks lose jobs or get "Almu'd" out of new ones because of them. It carries a stigma - and people are willing to pay to have a good shot at not having that stigma. Good defense attorneys get better deals for their folks. Are you going to tell me that you approach every defense attorney the same way? You offer the same deals to everyone? If you say yes, either YOU are full of crap or some kind of super-responsible DA who is one-in-a-million. Don't roll your eyes at defense-side legal fees when your colleagues "help out" those that charge more to their clients to begin with. Sam, let me ask you this also, what's the average tenure of an ADA in Harris County? My observation is about 3 years. Why is the turnover rate so high? It wouldn't be b/c the DA's office and the HPD crime lab make it a mess to work over there would it? Also, what profession do most former DA's jump to after leaving the DA's. Hmmmmm. Seems most jump over to the defense side to charge those same exorbitant fees you are in shock over. You also know, and mentioned that this is happening, that conviction rates are down, b/c people are getting smart. So they try this blood test protocol now, but it's not about safety. If it were they would have done this a long time ago. This is to make sure the state-side DWI cash cow continues to live. You and many people on this thread are bizarrely stark in your argument: "DWI is BAD! Anything for safety!" Yet, when I suggest the two measures that would absolutely clamp down on DWIs: mandatory alcohol sensors in new cars & checkpoints outside of bars, you all poopoo that idea, right? What happened to "anything for safety." "Safety" my ass.
Who else thinks it would have been fantastic to be a fly on the wall during this conversation by two drunk dudes at a strip club?
Wow...you just don't get it. There is no making you understand what a problem this is. I really hope that you never lose anybody to a drunk driver. You are really wound tightly about this...relax...have a drink.
What happens if a person has smoked mar1juana a couple days before said blood test and it shows up -- should that person be prosecuted?
Nope. The blood is drawn for a specific purpose (determining BAC). Probable cause only extends to that purpose.
Losing someone to a drunk driver is a tragedy of epic proportions. Giving police the power to draw blood anytime they feel like it is also tragic. Gotta think at least a little about the things that make America, America.
Just want to add that I in no way think anyone should get behind the wheel of any vehicle if they are LEGALLY drunk, talking on a cell phone, high, falling asleep, otherwise impaired, etc. If you do, you are an idiot and if you get popped, your problem. Just hire a good attorney. Trust me, the DAs (Sam excepted), will give your high-priced guy a better deal for you than a low-rent guy would get. What I'm saying is that the system is screwed up - badly. It is not about public safety, it's about generating revenue. The police WILL abuse this authority - and no on-call judge will deny a cop a warrant. Despite what Sam the Upstanding DA says, the DA's office will continue to try and prosecute those who fall under .08 BAC. HPD will continue to arrest people who are not legally drunk, in the hopes of getting more overtime $$$ for court appearances. In the meantime, every now and then some jackass alcoholic will down half a bottle of gin, get on the highway, and wipe out a family - undeterred by HPD/Harris County DA's Office strapping people who have maybe had 2 or 3 drinks with dinner down, to take blood from them hours after arrest. This will do nothing to end DWI deaths. It's an end-run around folks' refusal to submit to shoddy breath/field sobriety tests.
Flawed logic. What makes you think this officer stopping the 2-3 drink driver will be in position to catch the jackass alcoholic otherwise. They stop who they see.
Falcons Talon, I'm curious about something - let me get your thoughts on this. You've been one of the most adamant propenents of "safety at all costs" in this thread. Speeding & reckless driving likely lead to more deaths than driving. You drive a powerful muscle car - a machine built for speed. Now I'm sure you never ever speed on the street in that Mustang, but you know that tons of folks with similar cars do. Would you be in favor of the installation of speed limiters on these cars that would kick in if you went above the speed limit on the street/off-racetrack limiters/sensors notified authorities if you went, let's say 10 MPH over the speed limit? I assume you would be for something like this since you never gun it on the street in your car, and since you are such a die-hard public safety proponent. I mean, if this had been installed on Nick Hogan's car, there would be one less kid with brain damage now, right?
No it's not. He's in the same position he is to catch EVERYONE, but taking blood tests from a "select few" will not lead to less DWI deaths overall. It will only lead to more convictions. The problem is not in the arrest. HPD does a fine job of throwing tons of people in the can and getting them off of the street whether they are under .08 or over. This measure though, the one we're arguing over, is not built to help HPD pull more people off. By the time they take the test you've already been arrested and are off the street. This is just another way of upping the conviction rate for DWIs. That's it. This is NOT a safety measure. This does NOT get drunks off of the streets. You want to get drunks off of the street? Start checkpoints outside bars before people get to their cars & install alcohol sensors in vehicles. Those options don't sound appetizing to you guys though, do they?
Refman, I'll have a drink after the Cowboys lose tonight & the Rockets win. Then I'll be relaxed! I DO understand what a problem this is, but my point is that this does nothing to reduce DWI's or DWI deaths. This is all about the crap conviction rate that the DA's office has for DWI charges now. People are oversimplifying the problem here. "DWI is bad! F you "drunk!" Take his blood! Jail for you!" If we all, as a society, do agree that DWI is such a problem, then WHY NOT install alcohol sensors in new cars? Why not have bars monitor the status of the patrons they serve? THAT would reduce DWI deaths.
Safety at all costs would have us all living in padded rooms breathing filtered air with no sharp objects. If they could do that, I would have NO PROBLEM with that. I've had friends killed by idiots street racing. My brother has permanent disabilities because some idiot was driving under the incluence of mar1juana. I've been hit TWICE by drunk drivers. I have no problem with installation of items that help people FOLLOW THE LAWS. I can gun it on the road without spinning the tires and get to the speed limit and still be within the boundaries of the law, enjoying my car within the boundaries of the law. Track time is race time. Have I not been clear on that? As for the people I know that own Mustangs, I've also already stated that if anyone in the Mustang club me and some friends founded four years ago is street racing or driving drunk, they are out of the club. What is so hard to understand?
So an officer stopping someone for having a few drinks allows a 1/2 bottle of whiskey drunk driver to escape on the other side of town...talk about the butterfly effect. If these new practices deter drunk drivers, then they've done a great job! Checkpoints? Will they be manned with maching gun nests...anything less would be pointless...
Falcon, you have been clear on when you race & when you don't. You've also been clear that you stay under speed limits. YOU might be in favor of it, but can you imagine the clamor if a law was passed that sports cars would have speed limiters/police-linked sensors, for those that went over by 10 MPH+, unless at a racetrack? You don't think that - if the technology were available - would be too invasive. I would bet that most people would think differently. I think taking someone's blood by force, hours after their arrest, is too invasive and does nothing to reduce DWI's & DWI deaths. It seems that many folks disagree with me and think that the alcohol sensors in cars is somehow more invasive than the blood tests, even though that would prevent people from driving drunk to begin with. My point is that this is a complex issue. It's not as cut & dry as many here make it out to be. Just because you disagree with this policy does not mean that you're going to go burn down MADD headquarters. I also don't think Fatty is a proponent of getting ****housed and driving all over the place. It's just that he is such a polarizing figure on this board that as soon as folks saw it was him posting something related to DWIs any sort of rational discussion of this issue went out the window.
