Yes, they COULD........however: If a person is arrested for a traffic offense and agrees to submit to a breath test (and they take the test), that it it. You cannot then turn around and ask for blood unless you can articulate why you suspect drugs are involved OR you are able to get a search warrant. And of course this is assuming that the breath test given at the scene is an actual breathanalysis test and not just a PBT. If you give a PBT at the scene of a major collision and it supports your PC that the driver is drunk, you had best be going for blood as opposed to a breath test for alcohol.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Indianapolis Police Protest Ride
- Thread starter Crap
- Start date
Same in Kansas, however you can't demand a second test, just cuz you want one. You have to be able to articulate WHY you need another test.
You think I am drunk, and ask for a breath test. If it doesn't give the result you are expecting, you have to be able to articulate WHY you need a subsequent blood test. Unless you can articulate why you need additional testing, you would be hard pressed to get me on a refusal to test, when I already submitted to the test you requested.
The Implied Consent says: A chemical test of your blood, breath, urine or saliva.....it does not say blood, break urine AND saliva.
Most times, you get one test.......it is incumbent upon the Officer to get the right test the first time (in my opinion). . . . .and in the case of major injury/fatalities, you are better off to get a blood draw.
You think I am drunk, and ask for a breath test. If it doesn't give the result you are expecting, you have to be able to articulate WHY you need a subsequent blood test. Unless you can articulate why you need additional testing, you would be hard pressed to get me on a refusal to test, when I already submitted to the test you requested.
The Implied Consent says: A chemical test of your blood, breath, urine or saliva.....it does not say blood, break urine AND saliva.
Most times, you get one test.......it is incumbent upon the Officer to get the right test the first time (in my opinion). . . . .and in the case of major injury/fatalities, you are better off to get a blood draw.
Uma Sankar
New member
I don't think we need to offer any particular justification, other than "I want it"! LOL However, I agree, if the guy has already supplied you with one of the tests I doubt you'd ever get a refusal conviction based on the second test.
LegiTeamObstruxion
New member
Originally Posted by Guntoter
I hope this site does not become yet another police bashing site like so many others have turned into. Go to nearly any firearm related forum site and it seems like every other post goes on a cop bashing binge that is as bad as anything Al Queda would post. The threats of death, destruction and whatnot from these mom's basement dwelling dweebs is phenomenol. Hopefully it does not degenerate into that here too.
+1
I hope this site does not become yet another police bashing site like so many others have turned into. Go to nearly any firearm related forum site and it seems like every other post goes on a cop bashing binge that is as bad as anything Al Queda would post. The threats of death, destruction and whatnot from these mom's basement dwelling dweebs is phenomenol. Hopefully it does not degenerate into that here too.
+1
tonya_momma
New member
Anyone in leadership/authority should be held to a higher standard. I have seen too many times authority figures get away with things they would get hammered for if they where regular folks. This is why so many people carry annomosity toward the police and political figures. The corperate world is worse, the double standards are called privilages. The violations of these rules by the non management employees would often times end in termination. The standards should be high for authority figures when they violate the public trust that to me is worse than breaking the law. The next step is punishment should be harsher for violateing the laws they enforce or create. I am from Il you all know how the air of cooruption is in this state. I also come from a town that has morality issues with in the police force that ends up compromiseing public safety. Short handing a small town force with a growing big city crime issues. The officer should be hammered and his fellow officers should be on guard to protect their group image from future tarnish. The officer who got the bad test run should face sever in house punishment or termination also he knew what he was doing. I have seen that before too. I am not bashing all cops by any means, my best man is in law enforcement and many other long time friends who are law enforcement officers. I just want accountability to be atleast the same for all violaters nomatter what side of the law your on.
~~go with the flow~~
New member
Oops! Agree with you there, I was refering to the guy that screwed up the test. I doubt it was an accident, but I don't know the facts so I won't condem him just yet. Even cops are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. I do agree with one of the other posters here who said they should be held to a higher standard. We in LE understand that and are glad to accept it.