Mili Note: AUGH! NOT HERE!
Wyoming latest state to introduce legislation mandating driver compliance
The bill, which would see any driver suspected of driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol lose their right to refuse any chemical tests for alcohol, was cleared by The House Judiciary Committee yesterday to move forward for debate.
If successful, the bill would overturn a 50-year-old implied consent law, which allows drivers to say no to blood or urine tests.
While police representatives endorsed the bill, defense lawyer Robert Moxley argued against the legislation, noting that it was unnecessary for any competent prosecutor to rely on test results in cases where a driver is really impaired from operating a vehicle.
“I think this is a Draconian solution to a nonexistent or minimum problem,” Moxley said, adding that the legislation is unconstitutional.
“The question is if government should subject people to battery,” he said. “You can’t make people blow into a breath system.”
In questions over the proposed law, the Judiciary Committee chairman mulled whether the proposed law could be abused by law enforcement, and expressed concern that forced blood draws from uncooperative drivers could endanger both the driver and the person taking the blood.
Nevertheless, the legislation, sponsored by Jackson Republican Rep. Keith Gingery, was endorsed by the committee in a 5-4 vote.
The federally sponsored ‘no refusal’ blood draw program has been gathering pace and has already been instituted in several other States. As we have previously highlighted, police in Texas and Idaho are already forcibly jabbing needles into people’s arms and taking their blood at DUI checkpoints, even if they are merely “suspected” of being drunk.
The Associated Press reported last year that officers in Texas and Idaho are training to withdraw blood from “suspects” as a replacement for the standard breathalyzer test, primarily because police can’t make anyone breathe into a tube but apparently, in the “land of the free,” they can forcibly hold someone down and jab a needle into their arm and take their blood, “a practice that’s been upheld by Idaho’s Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court,”.
Nicole Watson, the College of Western Idaho phlebotomy instructor teaching the Idaho officers, has described how the process would unfold.
“Once they’re back on patrol, they will draw blood of any suspected drunk driver who refuses a breath test. They’ll use force if they need to, such as getting help from another officer to pin down a suspect and potentially strap them down, Watson said.”
The following recent CNN report highlights how the program has also been adopted in Utah, Arizona, Kansas, Missouri, Illinois, Louisiana and Florida:
The trashing of the implied consent law has also been made official in South Dakota, so far without challenge.
The practice of cops drawing blood at the side of the road has been in place in some areas since 1995 but the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has indicated that the program is ultimately intended to be introduced nationwide.
As Alex Jones exposed over a decade ago, the eventual plan, under a 1993 executive order signed by Bill Clinton, is to institute mandatory blood and urine testing at the DMV.