"No-Refusal" checkpoints throughout Tennessee this holiday season

[Guest TNdad]

TN DHS along with THP will be setting up checkpoints during the holidays that no one can refuse being searched. I'm not sure what extra scrutiny that CCW holders will get, but I know that I don't want to try. Being warned is being armed. Check out the URL below. http://tncampaignforliberty.org/wordpress/2012/12/list-of-tn-unconstitutional-checkpoints-christmas-2012/

[Will Carry]

Doesn't that violate our constituional rights? Like maybe the 4th?

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized

[viscero]

I don't see anything on the official releases about no-refusal check points.  Is the linked site legit or just one of those that likes to stir the pot on this kind of stuff?

[Guest bkelm18]

"Once your blood and DNA is forcibly extracted from you it gets stored in a government database. "

 

 
Sounds a little tin-foil to me...

Edited December 21, 2012 by bkelm18

[TripleDigitRide]

If you've had a few too many eggnogs or want transport that nuclear bomb to Grandma's house, looks like you'll be safe doing so up here through Robertson County.

[Guest TNdad]

The TN legislature passed a bill that allows the police to force a blood sample for no overt reason. If they'll use it, I don't know. But I don't think it's too much of a stretch to believe that any blood taken will wind up in a DNA database.


Quoted From the Nashville Criminal Report website:
On January 1 , 2012 a new DUI law comes into effect in Tennessee. Tennessee Code Annotated 55-10-406(f) expands the circumstances in which a Tennessee law enforcement officer can require a blood alcohol test without the consent of the accused. Tennessee law will allow an officer to require a chemical test to determine the accused's blood alcohol level when the officer has probable cause to believe the motorist has committed a violation of DUI , vehicular homicide by intoxication or aggravated vehicular homicide , and
1.The suspect was involved in an accident causing injury or death to another ;
2.The suspect has previously been convicted of DUI , Vehicular Homicide by Intoxication or Aggravated Vehicular Assault ; or
3.The suspect has a passenger in the car who is a child under the age of 16. Edited December 21, 2012 by TNdad

[TMF]

So officers take blood on the side of the road now and are equipped with a sterile lab in their squad cars to test the blood? Here I thought those were conducted in hospitals by nurse types or phlebotomists. I'm impressed that our officers have such wide ranging qualifications.

[Dolomite_supafly]

So officers take blood on the side of the road now and are equipped with a sterile lab in their squad cars to test the blood? Here I thought those were conducted in hospitals by nurse types or phlebotomists. I'm impressed that our officers have such wide ranging qualifications.

 

LOL, not sure I would want them taking my blood considering the recent thread about how bad their aim is on the range.

 

Dolomite

[Pain103]

  Somebody with no knowledge and a chip on their shoulder runs that website. THP will conduct sobriety/DL checkpoints as they usually do. They are allowed by statute to inspect driver's licenses. There is no search. The forced blood draw law has nothing to do with this. That statute mandates a forced blood draw on someone you have probable cause to believe it impaired and is DUI 2nd offense or more, involved in a crash that results in another person's injury, or DUI with a person under 16 as a passenger.

[RichardR]

I wonder what George Washington or Thomas Jefferson would think.

[Guest bkelm18]

So officers take blood on the side of the road now and are equipped with a sterile lab in their squad cars to test the blood? Here I thought those were conducted in hospitals by nurse types or phlebotomists. I'm impressed that our officers have such wide ranging qualifications.

 

Not to mention the equipment and the know-how for DNA extraction, apparently.

[Dolomite_supafly]

I wonder what George Washington or Thomas Jefferson would think.

 

They would probably think their are consequences for breaking the law.

 

Don't want to be arrested and have your blood drawn then don't break the law. Driving on public roadways is not a right it is a priviledge. And that priviledge can be taken away.

 

Dolomite

Edited December 21, 2012 by Dolomite_supafly

[RED333]

Yall aint seen CSI shows, they do it all the time.

[NRA]

They would probably think their are consequences for breaking the law.

 

Don't want to be arrested and have your blood drawn then don't break the law. Driving on public roadways is not a right it is a priviledge. And that priviledge can be taken away.

 

Dolomite

Thank you ............ lets all just get a grip

[Caster]

Sure fire way to hide from the fuzz....stop breaking the gotdang law. I guarantee my method for ducking speeding tickets works. No cop can catch me. I DRIVE THE SPEED LIMIT. They can't get me for DUI either. I drink at home, alone. It's funny how cops ignore you and leave you alone when you obey the law.

[mav]

Driving on public roadways is not a right it is a priviledge. And that priviledge can be taken away.

 

Dolomite

 

Not to be argumentative, but I often hear phrases like that being espoused and I sometimes think it is a little odd.  In this case it seems to me that if one is a taxpayer and they paid for those roads that it would their right to use them, not a privilege.

 

As far as the OP goes, seems a little far-fetched to me.  I didn't know officers had the equipment nor the know-how to draw blood samples.  I did get a kick out of the article when it said you would be asked for your papers. Papiere, bitte! ;)  I don't have any papers, just my dl, hcp, and insurance card.

[vontar]

I wonder what George Washington or Thomas Jefferson would think.

remember that small earthquake in Washington DC a while back?  That was them rolling in their graves.  :D

Edited December 22, 2012 by vontar

[Dolomite_supafly]

Not to be argumentative, but I often hear phrases like that being espoused and I sometimes think it is a little odd.  In this case it seems to me that if one is a taxpayer and they paid for those roads that it would their right to use them, not a privilege.

 

As far as the OP goes, seems a little far-fetched to me.  I didn't know officers had the equipment nor the know-how to draw blood samples.  I did get a kick out of the article when it said you would be asked for your papers. Papiere, bitte! ;)  I don't have any papers, just my dl, hcp, and insurance card.

 

A right cannot be taken away but a priviledge can. Driving on a public roadway is a priviledge.

 

Dolomite

[G27]

I wonder what George Washington or Thomas Jefferson would think.

I suspect they'd be awestruck by the presence of an automobile.

[RichardR]

Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters. –Daniel Webster (1782-1852)

[RichardR]

Just musing a bit on what our Founding Fathers would have thought, not really looking for arguements, just a bit of discussion of where we (as a nation) have been, are at, and are currently on the path to).

[RobertNashville]

You know; when talking about the law, it often helps to actually look at it. ;)

 

Public Chapter 307 allows law enforcement officers in TN to require blood of a driver under arrest for DUI when (a) he/she has a prior DUI conviction or (b) a child under 16 years of age is in the vehicle at the time of the arrest. This new law will go into effect January 1, 2012. Attached is the link:

http://dui.tndagc.org/resources/Legi...ed%20blood.pdf

 

I don't know "who" actually draws the blood or tests it but I would presume it's the exact same procedure used now (as police have always been able to force a blood test with a warrant).

[G27]

Just musing a bit on what our Founding Fathers would have thought, not really looking for arguements, just a bit of discussion of where we (as a nation) have been, are at, and are currently on the path to).

Yah, I was just screwing around.

 

I believe Jefferson would have led a revolt when the Federal Reserve was created in 1913.

Edited December 22, 2012 by crimsonaudio

[RobertNashville]

A right cannot be taken away but a priviledge can. Driving on a public roadway is a priviledge.

 

Dolomite

I think it would be more correct to say that "driving" a motor vehicle is a privilege; I don't believe that using the roadway is a privilege.

 

We may not have the right to drive but I think it can be argued that we do have the right to travel freely and without undue restrictions from one place to another and since roads are (almost always) paid for by taxes I think the government would have a difficult time saying you can't use them at all. ;)

[RobertNashville]

Just musing a bit on what our Founding Fathers would have thought, not really looking for arguements, just a bit of discussion of where we (as a nation) have been, are at, and are currently on the path to).

I suspect that even our founders understood that rights have to be balanced and that there is a place for regulation.

 

What we have a right to do in our own homes...on our own private property, is significantly greater than what we have a "right" to do once we are in the public arena.  Anytime one person's right starts to infringe on another person's right, government has a legitimate role in setting boundaries and rules.

 

I.E....you have a right to listen to music on your car stereo while driving down the street; you do not have a right to listen at a volume so loud you could damage the hearing of people on the street as you drive by. By the same token, you can be drunk as a sailor in your own home...walk out on the street and it's a different matter...get behind the wheel of your car and it's really a different matter. ;)