My response is towards The Texas Blogbonnet's blog about the Austin Police Department's plan to force suspected intoxicated individuals who refuse to take a breathalyser test, to draw blood instead.
Originally, the idea of police officers drawing blood from individuals suspected of driving while intoxicated was an unnerving idea, but after doing a little bit of reading on the subject, it doesn’t sound so unsettling. First of all, they cannot (and won’t) physically force anyone to give a blood sample if they refuse the breathalyser test, but if they do refuse both, additional charges will be added on. Also, officers are trained on the medical procedure.
I read of a case where a woman was arrested on suspicion of DUI after her car struck and killed a motorcyclist and agreed to a breath test, which found minimal alcohol. The woman refused to give blood, so the police obtained a warrant and discovered her blood tested positive for marijuana and cocaine. It’s cases like that that make me favor the blood test idea. Breathalysers do not catch everything.
I will say though, those that are going to drink are not going to be considering the fact that if they are caught behind the wheel they’re going to be poked with a needle. Usually those that drive intoxicated either do not think they are “that drunk” or they choose to do it anyway. When someone is in that inebriated frame of mind, they don’t think clearly (obviously), so I personally don’t think that this new plan of on-the-spot blood testing is going to deter those that would drive intoxicated anyway.
I really think that harsher punishments for drunk driving need to be considered. Rather than having multiple offenses, and suspending licenses, throw them in jail for some years after just one offense. Make them really see how severe it is to drive while intoxicated, even if they (luckily) did not hurt anyone. Serving up to 90 days in jail plus a suspension of driver’s license for 18 months does not seem like a severe enough punishment to me. Hit them hard enough after the first offense that there won’t BE a second offense. Don’t allow them a way out just by hiring a fancy high-priced lawyer, because otherwise they just continue to buy their way out of punishment.
People argue that this plan takes away our rights, but driving is not a right and people do not take seem to take it seriously. If someone is stupid enough to get behind the wheel while intoxicated, they deserve to be hit with a callous punishment along with having their driving privileges revoked; they have proven they do not have enough responsibility to have a license to drive.
1 comment:
I read a commentary on one of my colleague’s blogs about how the Austin Police Department deals with individuals who are suspected of being under the influence. The author of the blog explains how APD will tack on additional charges to suspects who refuse both a breathalyzer and blood test. The author then goes on to say that this more than likely will not detour many drivers who are in fact under the influence. I would agree completely with the argument put forth in the commentary .I do not necessarily think that the threat of a blood test is going to stop anyone who is intoxicated from getting behind the wheel. If they have decided to drive drunk then they have already consciously made the decision to break the law in the first place. Not to mention to put their lives and others at risk. This brings me to the next item the author discusses, the idea of making the punishments for driving under the influence significantly harsher. Drunk drivers should absolutely face stiffer punishments. People should know and fear the punishments for driving drunk or intoxicated. It should be a one shot deal, not this maybe jail, maybe not game that it is today. By no means is driving drunk a victimless crime, as it can quickly turn incredibly dangerous and often fatal. People should be detoured from driving while they are intoxicated in the first place and hopefully that would be achieved with stiffer penalties. Perhaps this new blood testing policy will act as a deterrent to some would be drunk drivers. It is a bit unnerving that we are just short of having police officers acting as phlebotomists. However, the thought of getting broadsided by a drunk driver seems like an even worse deal.
Post a Comment