New drunk driving laws for 2014

[Rooskibar03]

http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/18/co...-laws-in-2014/

Colorado’s drunk driving laws will become stricter on Jan. 1, when people who refuse to take roadside sobriety tests will be treated as “persistent drunk drivers,” whether they are drunk or not.


While motorists have the right to refuse a blood test or breathalyzer, doing so creates an automatic presumption of drunkenness under current law and carries all the penalties associated with it. The “persistent” label carries with it more onerous penalties.

So I'm pulled over at a roadside stop and because I've done nothing wrong I don't consent to search I'm now labeled a criminal and given the same sentence as someone who has been proven guilty?

What the hell is happening to our state?

[Great-Kazoo]

Smell like pot, the standards are different.

[Ranger353]

Smell like pot, the standards are different.

You know, there's a lot of truth to that statement. I am afraid that the Kalifornia Refugees have decided to again try to make their new home a "Utopia" with BS laws. It's just a matter of time now before Colorado becomes the same crime infested, victim pool state as the lefty west coast.

[RCCrawler]

How long before it:

PD: We think you robbed that liquor store, we need to search your house.
Me: You aren't searching my house I've never even been in that liquor store.
PD: I'll accept your denial of a search as your admission of guilt, you're going to jail.

[Rooskibar03]

How long before it:

PD: We think you robbed that liquor store, we need to search your house.
Me: You aren't searching my house I've never even been in that liquor store.
PD: I'll accept your denial of a search as your admission of guilt, you're going to jail.

Not that far. Texas just ruled search warrants may be based on prediction of the commission of future crimes.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...future-crimes/

[JohnnyDrama]

I've wondered about being asked to provide a DNA sample to be ruled out as a suspect.

[ChuckNorris]

"You have the right . . . . . ."

Yeah - sure you do.

[brianakell]

"You have the right . . . . . ."

Yeah - sure you do.

its that refusing? You never said a word...
And the other side says "what do you have t worry about unless you did do something wrong" What ever happened to innocent until PROVEN guilty? I dont drink and drive, and do not condone others doing it, but laws are laws, and this is rediculous.

[Bailey Guns]

http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/18/co...-laws-in-2014/



So I'm pulled over at a roadside stop and because I've done nothing wrong I don't consent to search I'm now labeled a criminal and given the same sentence as someone who has been proven guilty?

What the hell is happening to our state?

I'm assuming you mean a DUI checkpoint? First of all, the entire stop if you haven't been drinking and there's no evidence you've been drinking will probably take about 30 seconds to 1 minute. That's been my experience, anyway. Something else that's common is the officer smells alcohol in the car and asks you to submit to some maneuvers. An officer is well within his/her rights to do that if he smells the odor of an alcoholic beverage coming from the car...even if, for example, you're the DD for the group of intoxicated people. He/she will probably do a few tests like a PBT or HGN and send you on your way as it will be obvious you weren't the one drinking. The only time you'll be asked to be "searched", which would be a chemical test of your blood or breath, is when the officer has developed probable cause to arrest you based on observed evidence. If you've been stopped as a result of a traffic violation or other DUI indicators, you have done something wrong and if you refuse to take the test if you're arrested you're still going to lose you license for a year.

And that's been the law since I started in LE in the late 80s. So, you have a few options: don't drink then drive or don't get a driver's license and don't drive. The express consent law has required drivers to consent to a chemical test of their blood or breath when a police officer has a reasonable belief the driver is under the influence of alcohol or some other substance. Once the officer develops probable cause to arrest and makes the arrest the penalty for a first offense of refusing a chemical test is already 12 months so I'm not seeing a big change in punishment, except for the label "persistent drunk driver".

You can refuse roadside sobriety maneuvers all you want without a lot of consequence with the exception the officer may go ahead and arrest you based on whatever evidence he/she has (driving violation, odor of alcoholic beverage, etc...). You can also refuse to a test if the officer arrests you...but the consequences are a lot tougher. But you also agreed to take that chemical test when you operated your motor vehicle in the State of Colorado in the event you are arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence.

I have no sympathy for drunk drivers and that's the one thing I never gave anyone a break on...except for maybe taking them home or to detox after processing them instead of jail. I personally have arrested over 850 people for DUI. I lost one DoR hearing (because I arrested another DUI on the way to the hearing and the hearing officer wouldn't reschedule) and I lost once at trial.

You can flame me all you want but I don't know of too many cops who are randomly gonna stop you, get you out of the car, ask you to take a blood/breath test when it's obvious you haven't been drinking, and throw you in jail when you refuse the test.

[KLR650]

You know, there's a lot of truth to that statement. I am afraid that the Kalifornia Refugees have decided to again try to make their new home a "Utopia" with BS laws. It's just a matter of time now before Colorado becomes the same crime infested, victim pool state as the lefty west coast.

Now now. some of us left that repressive regime for a better life, like my ancestors leaving europe. The real problem is no one in politics is really pro liberty. not dems not republicans.