Police Pull Over More Drivers For DNA Tests 562
schwit1 sends this news from the Washington Times:
"Pennsylvania police this week were pulling people to the side of the road, quizzing them on their driving habits, and asking if they'd like to provide a cheek swap or a blood sample — the latest in a federally contracted operation that's touted as making roads safer. The same operation took place last month at a community in Texas. Then, drivers were randomly told to pull off the road into a parking lot, where white-coated researchers asked if they'd like to provide DNA samples for a project that determines what percentage of drivers are operating under the influence of drugs or alcohol at given times. With uniformed police in the background, the researchers also offered the motorists money — up to $50 or so — for the blood or saliva samples."
Re:WTF (Score:3, Informative)
About as much as Freedom & Peace had to do with the Iraq War.
Re:Um.... (Score:5, Informative)
"Who'd really buy into that? "
According to the news story I read, a lot of people in Texas "bought" that, because they were under the impression they had no choice. One woman, in an interview, said she was intimidated by the police questions and thought she had to comply.
That news story (apologies, I don't have a link) also claimed that their breath was being sampled by an experimental "non contact" breathalyzer device without being notified in advance and without their consent.
Not taking DNA, allegedly (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.pire.org/topiclist2.asp?cms=63 [pire.org]
They don't stop everybody, they stop, say, every third car. And they use high-pressure sales techniques to try to get "biological samples". But they actually don't arrest people they find impaired; they try to arrange transportation for them. And they don't claim to actually collect or register DNA, just the presence of drugs. I don't think that makes it right, but let's at least be accurate about what they're doing.
More information and links to past examples of these "studies":
http://www.politechbot.com/2007/09/21/colorado-sheriff-creates/ [politechbot.com]
Re:Um.... (Score:2, Informative)
The overwhelming majority of police are, frankly, pretty good folk who actually enjoy serving the public.
If you really believe this you are either willfully ignorant or a child,
You have good reason to fear cops (Score:2, Informative)
In the U.S., more people have been killed in so-called "justifiable homicides" by police officers than terrorists in the last ten years according to crime statistics. So, I guess you could say, "If you let the cops do this, the more-deadly-than-terrorists win"?
Re:Participation not exactly "voluntary"... (Score:2, Informative)
When this happened in Fort Worth, the news interviewed a guy that was shocked by it and turned it down. He made it clear he didn't want anything to do with it and was "free to go".
http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/North-Texas-Drivers-Stopped-at-Roadblock-Asked-for-Saliva-Blood-232438621.html
Re:Um.... (Score:3, Informative)
Two Kinds Of Cops... (Score:5, Informative)
There are only two kinds of cops: 1.) Bad cops and 2.) Accessories after the fact.
Re:Um.... (Score:5, Informative)
It's long past time that Americans followed in the footsteps of Russians. Everybody should have a dash cam. Everybody. Seriously folks. Put it on your Christmas lists. It's way past time.
Re:Remember (Score:5, Informative)
Since when is Pennsylvania a "red state?"
In terms of the state government? 2012.
Governor - Tom Corbett, Republican
Lieutenant Governor - Jim Cawley, Republican
Pennsylvania House of Representatives - 110 Republican, 92 Democrat, 1 Vacant
Pennsylvania State Senate - 27 Republican, 23 Democrat
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania - 4 Republican, 3 Democrat
Re:Um.... (Score:5, Informative)
There is a huge amount of information to collect based on subjects' reactions to these requests for DNA. At the very least, the cops must be compiling a naughty/nice list indexed to license plate based on who accepts a cheek swab. Making the link from license plate to individual is pretty easy, especially if they're also taking video of their proceedings. People are forced to play the game and there's no way to win.
That was my thought, also. So you're driving home at 2:00 AM from a late night code hacking marathon, the cop checks your plate, which is common practice for cars on the road late at night, [1] sees that you declined an optional cheek swab 3 months ago, and pulls you over for "weaving". It's easy to imagine getting extra scrutiny in the future for declining a swab now.
[1] I worked nights for an 18 month contract once, going home in the wee hours, and was pulled over... oh, maybe eight or nine times during that stint, for really bizarre reasons, including "weaving" and not signaling a lane change when two lanes converged into one. (Seriously?) They'd check my papers, and let me go. I finally asked an officer, respectfully, why this was happening so often, and in a rare moment of candor, he said they consider a single car late at night to be a warning sign, and "we have to pull you over for something" in order to check you out.
Re:WTF indeed (Score:4, Informative)
I don't disagree on the quality of reporting. But this NHSTA funded study is real and has been covered several times in the national press. The author of the article assumes the reader is already aware of said study. It's basically a redo of this 2007 study.
http://www.nhtsa.gov/DOT/NHTSA/Traffic%20Injury%20Control/Articles/Associated%20Files/811175.pdf [nhtsa.gov]
It's covered on Ron Paul's website. I wouldn't call this a "rumor". It's a reality and a poorly written article that makes assumptions about it's readership knowledge about current events. Just because you don't know about these research projects doesn't mean it's rumor. It's good research and helps policy makers understand the real danger of impaired driving. I don't like how it's being done or that cops are used but it's still valid research that's needed in the continuous drive to make our roadways safer.