It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Police may take blood sample without warrant, court says

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 09:54 PM
My first thought was about my best friend. He's a hemophiliac and I've seen him BLEED.

Hemophiliac's require special care when blood is taken or it can go very badly. He told me a story about a time a nurse tried to take his blood but wasn't aware of his condition. The blood sprayed 4-5 feet from just that little needle they use to draw blood. He would NEVER allow a police officer to draw his blood as it would most likey lead to a blood transfusion.


posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 12:50 AM
I'm not quite sure where you would draw the line for the crime committed while intoxicated, but if someone was killed or mortally wounded then I would find it acceptable to test the driver for their alcohol level. But I would also say that they do a breathalyser first and if that test shows they are on a boarder line or a breaking point where they need a blood test to attempt to determine the level at the time of incident or whatever, then a blood test could be required.

Really the whole thing sets me off as it seems the timing is right as states are really coming into swing with building DNA databases.

posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 07:27 AM
reply to post by Vasilis Azoth

Does your friend wear a bracelet or necklace stating his condition? He should, if not.

posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 07:43 AM
Surprise, another bite out of your civil liberties. Giving the police more power is a massive mistake. Where will this stop? Next, they will say the authorities can take an arm, or a leg without your permission. Maybe you become a donor if you are unconscious for too long. You wake up like Robocop in the middle east in that new super-suit with just your brain controlling military gear... don't laugh...

posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 12:21 PM
Are they required to breathalyze first? Because I've actually had a problem with this. One night I was driving home from a friend's house, and suddenly I see police lights in the rearview. So I pull over (hadn't had a DROP to drink). It was about 2:30 am, bar close on weekends. Cop comes up to the car, asks for my license. Comes back after a few minutes, asks me to step out of the car. He said I'd been swerving. I told him, "Bullsh!t." So he's like, "Whoa, little aggressive there, son, mind taking a breathalyzer?" I tell him no, because he had no reason to pull me over. He basically threatens to take me downtown for a blood test, so I submit to the Nazi's breathalyzer. Of course, I blow 00s, cop tells me to watch my attitude, goes on his way. If this law is enforced as it is written, then because he SUSPECTED me of operating
[QUOTE]In a 5-2 decision, the Supreme Court said that the "rapid, natural dissipation of alcohol in the blood creates ... a circumstance [requiring immediate attention] that will justify police taking a warrantless, nonconsensual blood draw from a defendant" provided the officer has probable cause to believe that the defendant has committed criminal vehicular homicide or operation.[/QUOTE]
a vehicle under the influence, guy could have taken my blood. That's horrifying.

[edit on 3-6-2008 by '___'eviant]

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 05:19 PM
Is it legal for the arresting officer to draw blood?

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 06:54 PM
Not gonna happen around here! This is defensive murder waiting to happen!

I have yet to find a single overwhelming fear that I hold, except one.
That is someone else putting a needle in me, this due to some very unfortunate forced incidents when I was younger and weaker.

I'll take a knife and stick in my leg or even the syringe itself...stick it in and wiggle it around, no problem.

However, if someone else attempts to use or even attempts to threaten me with a syringe without my direction it will be the end of them which of course would mean the end of me as well...

This is not a light matter!

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 07:02 PM
Now it's taking your blood by force. Supposedly for intoxication identification.

How long do you really think it will be before they also admit your sample into the DNA data base?

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 07:26 PM
Interestingly enough, the free state of California has a similar law.

Blood tests do not hold up in court with a competent attorney, who will argue chain of custody.

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 07:38 PM

Originally posted by Dan Tanna
Here in the UK when you are arrested for drink driving you get the breath test at the road side and then again under a calibrated and certified system. If this fails or you refuse to provide, then a blood test can be taken by the force Dr with signed witnesses and an evidence chain in place.

That's right, but if there is not a qualified person (medic) to take the blood sample they can also simply do you for failing to provide a sample, it may be more paperwork to get the conviction through, and there are probably more opportunities for loop holes but the judge will make a point of giving a more or less equal sentence for either drink driving or failing to supply a sample.

Also I think if you breath test is above a certain amount, I think it's twice the limit, you are entitled to request a blood test... Or is it if your breath test is below a certain amount??

Rule of thumb - dont drink and drive

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in