Most people know that I despise checkpoints. I think they are completely unconstitutional. If you aren't breaking the law, there is no need for peace officers to be stopping you. However, across America these peace officers are not only planning to perform these unconstitutional acts, but they will be implementing a mandatory blood draw at DUI checkpoints for those that refuse to submit to a Breathalyzer test.
Police in Tarrant County in Texas will be doing this from 9:30pm Friday through 5:30am Monday.
Assistant District Attorney Richard Alpert said in a statement, "We continue to support 'no refusal' because we believe the citizens of Tarrant County should be able to travel our roadways without putting their lives at risk. Ending up dead or in jail is a poor way to celebrate our country's independence."
Oh yeah Mr. Alpert? It's also a poor way to celebrate independence by unlawfully stopping people. It's tyranny, not freedom.
Alpert's DA website will then openly display names and ages of those arrested and charged with DUI. They will also make quite a bit of money with those arrests too.
However, Texas is not alone. Oregon and Tennessee are going to be performing these invasive procedures for those they stop unconstitutionally, who won't submit to a Breathalyzer test.
According to KMTR in Oregon:
And this Fourth of July, if you refuse to take a breath alcohol test, you can plan on giving blood instead.
"In Lane County, we're encountering an average of perhaps 1,000 people per year who are driving under the influence," said Amy Seely with the Lane County District Attorney's Office, "and large numbers are refusing to provide a breath sample."
To address this problem, a no refusal program will be carried out on July 4 in Lane County, Eugene and Springfield with the help of Oregon State Police.
"If someone is contacted, suspected of being under the influence and the officer develops probable cause that they were operating their vehicle while under the influence, the officer will be filling out a search warrant," Seely said. "That search warrant will be submitted to a judge for review."
Two prosecutors, a judge and a phlebotomist will be on-call during the holiday to handle such cases.
The Tennessee Department of Safety and Homeland Security announced on Tuesday that they will also be involved in this procedure. According to their website:
The Tennessee Highway Patrol (THP) will conduct a high-visibility enforcement campaign during this year's Fourth of July holiday period, beginning at 12:01 a.m. on Thursday, July 3 and ending at midnight on Sunday, July 6. State troopers will utilize a variety of traffic safety tools, such as driver's license, sobriety and seat belt checkpoints, saturation patrols, and "No Refusal" enforcement, in an effort to reduce serious injury and fatal crashes on Tennessee roadways.
They then tout the numbers of people killed by drunk drivers in an attempt to justify stopping people who are not committing a crime.
Again, this will be a violation of civil rights, not to provide safety, but in order to shake down citizens for money, plain and simple.
At least in Oregon they are attempting to make it look like they will comply with search warrant procedure. However, it appears to me that the Fourth Amendment is clear that they should not be performing the checkpoints in the first place. In other words, the cops are doing it backwards. They are stopping people when there is no need to stop them and then obtaining a warrant, not the other way around.
Suzanne Hamner reported in June 2013 of Georgia police forcibly drawing blood from DUI suspects with courts backing them up claiming it was legal.
We have seen the lawlessness of these types of situations in body cavity searches, forced medical procedures, strip searches and even roadside invasive body cavity probes by police during routine traffic stops.
The Supreme Court has even taken the side of the police state and ruled that upon arrest it's perfectly legal to swab someone for DNA as well, even though they have not been convicted of a crime. Where is that in the Constitution? It isn't there.
I know there are people that say it's justified to keep people safe, right? Yet, there is that little phrase that Thomas Jefferson said, which is often attributed to Benjamin Franklin, "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
So, it looks like many Americans will be celebrating their chains of tyranny this weekend rather than independence and liberty.Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.