Gov getting blood and saliva from people on roadsides

[Ronin13]

This just screams violation. I'm not sure how TX law works, but here in CO we have "Expressed Consent"- basically saying by possessing a CO DL you give consent to chemical testing to prove you're safe to drive a car on public highways (IE: roads) IF the officer has reasonable suspicion to believe you are intoxicated.​ The SCOTUS ruled a few years ago that you have a "reasonable expectation of privacy" to your bodily fluids (blood), but the catch 22 is- again here, not sure about TX- if you refuse you could lose your license. Still nothing from the Supremes about the constitutionality of DUI checkpoints, but this is way over the line- no presumption and no evidence of any violations prior to the non-consensual stop? I call foul on this.

[Hound]

I suspect the real thing being studied here is not blood or saliva, but the constitutional knowledge of the average American ... the fact that 90% of the people didn't tell the officers to pound sand and then get together in a class action suit against the department tells the police everything they need to know; Americans are compliant sheep that will gladly hand over their constitutional rights at the drop of a hat and for no reason.

Dark days a comin' ... dark days.

+1

Something does not feel wrong... It is wrong. My first thought was on collcting DNA samples.

[kidicarus13]

"Here's some money. See, we're the good guys! Now just give me all your information."

So close to a bullseye it made me cringe.

[sniper7]

not a chance.

[kawiracer14]

This just screams violation. I'm not sure how TX law works, but here in CO we have "Expressed Consent"- basically saying by possessing a CO DL you give consent to chemical testing to prove you're safe to drive a car on public highways (IE: roads) IF the officer has reasonable suspicion to believe you are intoxicated.​ The SCOTUS ruled a few years ago that you have a "reasonable expectation of privacy" to your bodily fluids (blood), but the catch 22 is- again here, not sure about TX- if you refuse you could lose your license. Still nothing from the Supremes about the constitutionality of DUI checkpoints, but this is way over the line- no presumption and no evidence of any violations prior to the non-consensual stop? I call foul on this.

I know that in Bexar County (Where San Antonio is) you are required to give a blood sample if you get pulled over for suspicion of DUI... not sure about the rest of Texas - but its not required when driving - its required on suspicion of DUI.

[lowbeyond]

Just make it a law

Then people can start saying...

law is the law.

they were just doing their job

i will comply, as i am a law abiding citizen.

That is exactly how it will go. Yep.

[PugnacAutMortem]

Unreal. In Texas no less.

What is this place going to be like for our kids? For our kids' kids?

[rockhound]

DNA, not a chance, get a court order buddy

[hurley842002]

Unreal. In Texas no less.

What is this place going to be like for our kids? For our kids' kids?

I've got a six month old, and am VERY frightened for his future....

[hatidua]

In Texas no less.

I don't think Texas in 2013 is quite what Texas in 2003 or 1993 was. The demographics in TX will, all by themselves, shift Texas to the left in the not so distant future.