DUI refusal to submit breathalyzer

[Kirk Freeman]

Come get my blood. Not gonna happen.

Because the judge will refuse to sign the search warrant because there is no evidence, right?

 

[VUPDblue]

The warrant signed by a judge is a warrant to search for evidence. It's the same as if I had probable cause to believe you had a dead body in your freezer. I would have to present my PC to a judge and if he agreed that the PC indicated you did have the body in your freezer, then he would sign a warrant for me to search that freezer. In the case of a DUI, if I have PC to believe that you are intoxicated due to alcohol (or another drug) then I have to present that PC to a judge and he has to agree with my conclusion and sign the warrant before I can take your blood to search it for alcohol (or other drug) concentration.

To the poster who said "ain't gonna happen", the "you ain't takin' my blood because I'm a badass and I won't let you" routine has been tried before, often actually, and doesn't work. All that accomplishes is adding extra charges to your arrest and making the Probable Cause narrative I file all that more convincing of your impairment.

 

[copo]

The warrant signed by a judge is a warrant to search for evidence. It's the same as if I had probable cause to believe you had a dead body in your freezer. I would have to present my PC to a judge and if he agreed that the PC indicated you did have the body in your freezer, then he would sign a warrant for me to search that freezer. In the case of a DUI, if I have PC to believe that you are intoxicated due to alcohol (or another drug) then I have to present that PC to a judge and he has to agree with my conclusion and sign the warrant before I can take your blood to search it for alcohol (or other drug) concentration.

To the poster who said "ain't gonna happen", the "you ain't takin' my blood because I'm a badass and I won't let you" routine has been tried before, often actually, and doesn't work. All that accomplishes is adding extra charges to your arrest and making the Probable Cause narrative I file all that more convincing of your impairment.

What he said^^^^

 

[SumtnFancy]

I've heard that before. The issued warrant gives me the right take the blood from you. If that means it take 5 cops to hold you down while the lab draws the blood than so be it. It's a warrant signed by a judge.

Where do you draw the line? Holding people down and forcibly removing blood from their bodies? But it is for the common good of the people though, right? Protecting everyone else? Thugs. It is disgusting. I've been asked to take two breath tests, one when I hadn't even drank and one after a beer and a mixed drink. Not impaired in the least. What if I refused in those cases? Who are you protecting then? Just following orders? Your orders will keep becoming more and more aggressive until YOU are the problem with our country. I like how VUPD tried to throw in the "because I'm a badass" line to mock me. If I was a real badass, I'd put on a uniform with 5 friends and beat the sh*t out of people with a baton who don't do as I say. A judge signed it, so its Ok though, right? What happens in other states where the judges uphold unconstitutional laws and tell those cops to go door to door for guns? I've seen a disturbing trend here, you guys are one-issue voters. Can't take my guns, but can take every other freedom and personal liberty? No thanks. These laws only mean something if they find a group of meatheads who will go in force them. That is an unreasonable search and seizure.

 

[darkkevin]

oh, this isn't gonna end well...............................................



thanks for the clarification from those who responded

 

[public servant]

Where do you draw the line? Holding people down and forcibly removing blood from their bodies? But it is for the common good of the people though, right? Protecting everyone else? Thugs. It is disgusting. I've been asked to take two breath tests, one when I hadn't even drank and one after a beer and a mixed drink. Not impaired in the least. What if I refused in those cases? Who are you protecting then? Just following orders? Your orders will keep becoming more and more aggressive until YOU are the problem with our country. I like how VUPD tried to throw in the "because I'm a badass" line to mock me. If I was a real badass, I'd put on a uniform with 5 friends and beat the sh*t out of people with a baton who don't do as I say. A judge signed it, so its Ok though, right? What happens in other states where the judges uphold unconstitutional laws and tell those cops to go door to door for guns? I've seen a disturbing trend here, you guys are one-issue voters. Can't take my guns, but can take every other freedom and personal liberty? No thanks. These laws only mean something if they find a group of meatheads who will go in force them. That is an unreasonable search and seizure.

IC 9-30-6-1
Chemical test for intoxication; implied consent
Sec. 1. A person who operates a vehicle impliedly consents to submit to the chemical test provisions of this chapter as a condition of operating a vehicle in Indiana.
As added by P.L.2-1991, SEC.18.



You've already consented to the blood draw. So there is no line to draw.

 

[Skywired]

Come get my blood. Not gonna happen.

oh, this isn't gonna end well...............................................

Of course it wouldn't end well. It always amazes me that some citizens want to debate the law on the side of the road. You may not like it. You may even have a valid point. But, guess what? YOU WILL NOT WIN. If you have to have that tatooed across your forehead.. so be it. You may not like it. You may feel it is not fair. At the side of the road... your feelings make no difference.

If you want to debate law. If yo wish to change existing laws.... seek out the proper venue. AGAIN.... I assure you... that venue is NOT at the side of the road. Rant over.

 

[Denny347]

Where do you draw the line? Holding people down and forcibly removing blood from their bodies? But it is for the common good of the people though, right? Protecting everyone else? Thugs. It is disgusting. I've been asked to take two breath tests, one when I hadn't even drank and one after a beer and a mixed drink. Not impaired in the least. What if I refused in those cases? Who are you protecting then? Just following orders? Your orders will keep becoming more and more aggressive until YOU are the problem with our country. I like how VUPD tried to throw in the "because I'm a badass" line to mock me. If I was a real badass, I'd put on a uniform with 5 friends and beat the sh*t out of people with a baton who don't do as I say. A judge signed it, so its Ok though, right? What happens in other states where the judges uphold unconstitutional laws and tell those cops to go door to door for guns? I've seen a disturbing trend here, you guys are one-issue voters. Can't take my guns, but can take every other freedom and personal liberty? No thanks. These laws only mean something if they find a group of meatheads who will go in force them. That is an unreasonable search and seizure.

Well, when I read you implied consent, the first words I say is ,"I have PROBABLE CAUSE." You know, the stuff arrests are made from...and warrants. So I can take this PC and go before an impartial judge to apply for a search warrant. If the judge likes the PC, they will approve the warrant. If I can go to your house with a search warrant and you resisted that...it isn't going to end well. This search warrant is the same. You resist my valid warrant, I will still get your blood, you will get resisting charges. Your choice. It's the system we have...you know...getting warrants for a search. You got a better one? Let us know.

 

[SumtnFancy]

Can something be legal, yet unethical? Illegal, but ethical? You are nothing more than hired enforcers. There is a loophole around every amendment, a bogus law in place covering every angle. Doesn't make it right. You are the one who has to go home and look in the mirror at night. If I resist, it wouldnt end well for either of us.

 

[Hoosierkav]

Am I right in thinking that I can request a blood draw over a breathalyzer, and not be dinged for that request?

 

[Kutnupe14]

Can something be legal, yet unethical? Illegal, but ethical? You are nothing more than hired enforcers. There is a loophole around every amendment, a bogus law in place covering every angle. Doesn't make it right. You are the one who has to go home and look in the mirror at night. If I resist, it wouldnt end well for either of us.

:Facepalm: .....followed by laughter

 

[phylodog]

 

[public servant]

If I resist, it wouldnt end well for either of us.

Congratulation. Along with the DUI now there is also a resisting and a battery charge.

Can we just get the blood draw over with? There is only 4 lines for charges on the OAR...and it really sucks having to make out a second one.

 

[VUPDblue]

Am I right in thinking that I can request a blood draw over a breathalyzer, and not be dinged for that request?

You can request a blood draw all you want but I don't have to grant you your wish. It is my choice which chemical test to offer you. Keep in mind though, if you refuse a Certified Breath Test because you are hell-bent on the blood draw, I can call that a refusal of the test and your license will be suspended. Also know that you have better odds of "passing" the test on the Breath Test instrument. The way they collect and display the results of the sample lean VERY HARD in favor of the suspect. The blood test is absolute and will generally produce a higher evidentiary reading than the breath test.

 

[VUPDblue]

Congratulation. Along with the DUI now there is also a resisting and a battery charge.

Can we just get the blood draw over with? There is only 4 lines for charges on the OAR...and it really sucks having to make out a second one.

Since I'm a "young punk" I do my OARs electronically. It's no problem at all to print a second copy with more charges.

 

[VUPDblue]

Can something be legal, yet unethical? Illegal, but ethical? You are nothing more than hired enforcers. There is a loophole around every amendment, a bogus law in place covering every angle. Doesn't make it right. You are the one who has to go home and look in the mirror at night. If I resist, it wouldnt end well for either of us.

How is a test for intoxication unethical? You agreed to the test when you got your license in the first place. Are you in the camp that believes driving drunk is OK unless you hurt someone or something?

 

[SMiller]

Used to be everyone wanted the blood draw because they hoped that it would take forever to get to the hospital and would take forever for them to get around to drawing you blood and this might work for your blood to get rid of enough alcohol for you to pass but most times you will quickly get a blood draw and will be screwed, play the game if you think it will take forever and you might win or just don't drink and drive...

 

[cook5oh]

Can something be legal, yet unethical? Illegal, but ethical? You are nothing more than hired enforcers. There is a loophole around every amendment, a bogus law in place covering every angle. Doesn't make it right. You are the one who has to go home and look in the mirror at night. If I resist, it wouldnt end well for either of us.

I go home after a shift and look in the mirror, and i'm happy I get to make a difference. When you've seen innocent people killed from drunk driving, its pretty easy to call it "ethical" taking drunks off the road. No one forced you to get a drivers licenses. You consented when you decided to operate a motor vehicle.

Oh, and it would only end bad for you if you resist. You really think your the first person to say something like that? What a joke.

 

[SumtnFancy]

How is a test for intoxication unethical? You agreed to the test when you got your license in the first place. Are you in the camp that believes driving drunk is OK unless you hurt someone or something?

Thinking that you have the "right" to have 5 guys hold someone down and forcibly remove blood against their will is unethical. I never said drunk driving was Ok at all, just that I don't agree that you can FORCE something like that on people. The personal examples I gave had nothing to do with driving drunk, just a cop on a power trip (same cop both times).

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Thinking that you have the "right" to have 5 guys hold someone down and forcibly remove blood against their will is unethical. I never said drunk driving was Ok at all, just that I don't agree that you can FORCE something like that on people. The personal examples I gave had nothing to do with driving drunk, just a cop on a power trip (same cop both times).

If somebody raped somebody you cared about, would it be unethical to forcibly take blood or some other sample from the guy that eye witnesses say and evidence strongly indicates was the one that did the act?