patrick.net

This is his 3rd DWI. He should have lost his license on the 1st DWI.

A few million dollars in legal fees and years waiting for SCOTUS to rule, will solve this minor problem.

Is refusing to submit to the test, in fact, a crime? Wouldn't that be self incrimination?

HeadSet says

This is his 3rd DWI. He should have lost his license on the 1st DWI.

1st DWI should be mandatory car impound and sale, blacklist in all 50 states for 7 years from having a driver's license, possessing a vehicle, or buying auto insurance.

There should also be a $10,000 fine for any auto insurance agent mistakenly providing auto insurance while the person is on the blacklist, and any car dealer (new or used) selling or obtaining license/registration for that person (ie use the blacklist database or pay up).

2nd DWI should be a lifetime ban from operating or owning motor vehicles.

"But how can I get to work?"
Tough shit. Move to a city with a bus or subway.

All intoxicants, including Marijuana.

There are no laws that protect the guilty.

This case would be great if the Blood test came up negative.

NoCoupForYou says

HeadSet says

This is his 3rd DWI. He should have lost his license on the 1st DWI.

1st DWI should be mandatory car impound and sale, blacklist in all 50 states for 7 years from having a driver's license, possessing a vehicle, or buying auto insurance.

There should also be a $10,000 fine for any auto insurance agent mistakenly providing auto insurance while the person is on the blacklist, and any car dealer (new or used) selling or obtaining license/registration for that person (ie use the blacklist database or pay up).

2nd DWI should be a lifetime ban from operating or owning motor vehicles.

"But how can I get to work?"
Tough shit. Move to a city with a bus or subway.

All intoxicants, including Marijuana.

KILL THEM ALL! NO ONE CAN MAKE A MISTAKE! DEATH TO THE INEBRIATED! FEED THE SYSTEM THE 10-20K THEY NEED EACH TIME EVEN IF NO HARM WAS DONE! KILL THEM ALL! MORE REGULATIONS AND LAWS WILL CURE OUR ILLS!

Maybe a bit hard on the beaver?

A good lawyer can get the case before a judge who is a raging alcoholic and will sympathize. Sometimes it's harder to find a judge who isn't a raging alcoholic.

krc says

KILL THEM ALL! NO ONE CAN MAKE A MISTAKE! DEATH TO THE INEBRIATED! FEED THE SYSTEM THE 10-20K THEY NEED EACH TIME EVEN IF NO HARM WAS DONE! KILL THEM ALL! MORE REGULATIONS AND LAWS WILL CURE OUR ILLS!

Banning the deliberately inebriated from operating high speed multiton vehicles is not death. Nor is $10k really outweighing the thousands of deaths per year. The concern is the gross and calculated selfish negligence of the selfish, inebriated asshole. Nobody would care if drunk drivers just did doughnuts in their backyard with the Civic and fucked up their own lawn rather than Baby Bennie's face.

"All I did was get drunk and fire randomly into a street with my AR-15! MUH FREEDOM!!"

"Nobody eva died from drunk driving!!!"

"If I can't pilot a multiton vehicle completely sloshed and give a family coming back from Aunt Edna's Christmas Party a concussion and some broken limbs, Freedom! Has! No! Meaning! Memememememememe!

I absolutely don't condone drunk driving. It's bad. BUT, warrantless blood tests are an absolute violation from my legal perspective. Will it only apply to vehicles in the future? You give an inch, they'll take a mile.

It's one thing to get finger printed and that's dumped into a database. But having your DNA in a police/intelligence database (which is what will happen) is a far worse scenario in my opinion. And against your will basically because some LEO "maybe smelled" something that's having a shitty day and takes their life problems out on you.

I support law enforcement, but at what point is it too much power for one person, who in most cases isn't very well educated? Even those that are, most are criminal justice majors, which is a joke of a degree if you've taken some of the courses. The vast majority of cops are ego maniacs that get high on having power over you. Even the good ones. It's a recipe for disaster to ruin peoples lives.

My sister works with municipal police and was a county prosecutor for a decade as an attorney. My dad defended DUI's as an attorney. I know both sides VERY well for not having a law degree. Your typical muni cop (these are the worst), county cop, state trooper needs substantially LESS power. Warrantless blood test are a dangerous step.

They're also a waste of time. We have no refusal stops here in IL and rarely would it end up in a conviction. It's an overtime ploy and ploy to make attorneys money. That's its sole purpose for those that want to know. There's no evidence here in IL of reduced alcohol related deaths since these started I think about 7 years ago now.

Again, drunk driving is bad, but there are other ways to limit it without violating personal rights of what is generally law abiding citizens 99% of the time.

WookieMan says

I absolutely don't condone drunk driving. It's bad. BUT, warrantless blood tests are an absolute violation from my legal perspective. Will it only apply to vehicles in the future? You give an inch, they'll take a mile.

It's one thing to get finger printed and that's dumped into a database. But having your DNA in a police/intelligence database (which is what will happen) is a far worse scenario in my opinion. And against your will basically because some LEO "maybe smelled" something that's having a shitty day and takes their life problems out on you.

True, but arrogant drunk drivers piss me off. The repeat ones always seem to get off, and generally they've done it 20 times between arrests.

They always boo hoo hoo about getting to work, I say fuck 'em, take a bike, shoulda thought about that the 20 times you drunk drove before you got caught. Adios, car. Insurance, Registration blacklist nationwide.

There's no reason for forcible blood tests at the side of the road.

Drunk Drivers are worse than thieving crack heads for blaming the man. Most are incorrigible asshole alcoholics.

BUT, there's no reason to treat DUI's any differently than somebody who fires a gun randomly down the street while drunk.

Some years ago before all of the cross correlations and the increased California DUI penalties, a lady around here got three drunk drivings the same day in three different counties (they just cited and released her). She almost got away with pleading first offense status in each county. They eventually figured it out, but there would be immediate cross checking with the information highway nowadays. In those 'olden days', the first DUI was usually just a fine and a warning with some kind of probationary status.