posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 12:21 PM
Are they required to breathalyze first? Because I've actually had a problem with this. One night I was driving home from a friend's house, and
suddenly I see police lights in the rearview. So I pull over (hadn't had a DROP to drink). It was about 2:30 am, bar close on weekends. Cop comes
up to the car, asks for my license. Comes back after a few minutes, asks me to step out of the car. He said I'd been swerving. I told him,
"Bullsh!t." So he's like, "Whoa, little aggressive there, son, mind taking a breathalyzer?" I tell him no, because he had no reason to pull me
over. He basically threatens to take me downtown for a blood test, so I submit to the Nazi's breathalyzer. Of course, I blow 00s, cop tells me to
watch my attitude, goes on his way. If this law is enforced as it is written, then because he SUSPECTED me of operating
[QUOTE]In a 5-2 decision, the Supreme Court said that the "rapid, natural dissipation of alcohol in the blood creates ... a circumstance [requiring
immediate attention] that will justify police taking a warrantless, nonconsensual blood draw from a defendant" provided the officer has probable
cause to believe that the defendant has committed criminal vehicular homicide or operation.[/QUOTE]
a vehicle under the influence, guy could have taken my blood. That's horrifying.
[edit on 3-6-2008 by '___'eviant]