I figured that this would be particularly relevant to the alcoholic and addict. If you are a recovering addict or alcoholic who is particularly focused on remaining sober you are more than likely not concerned at the prospect of being stopped by police regarding suspicion of drinking and driving.
With that said, think back to when you were not on your best behavior; go a step further, perhaps you know other individuals, maybe even active alcoholics and addicts who drink alcohol or even use narcotics.
More over, as this issue implicates a constitutional right, namely the right to privacy, it has people up in arms!
In fact, the Fourth Amendment, a right that protects us against unreasonable search and seizure seems to be the central focus of all this sudden controversy.
If you do not already know, the fourth amendment, part and parcel, says: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
It comes down to whether or not you are prepared for a society in which, every time a person is stopped for SUSPICION of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, blood may be drawn without your consent!!! Sober or not, for many, those are fighting words.
Although many are saying it's more about public welfare, there are other alternatives to protect the welfare of others and insure that drivers are sober.
It's chilling to even imagine how such a crude, barbaric, uncivilized approach could change the landscape of our privacy rights.
To make a long story short, due to a traffic stop that occurred in Missouri, the United States Supreme Court is currently determining whether compelled blood tests will be the wave of the future.
Further, the Supreme Court has already decided that a person's blood is protected under the Fourth Amendment, Chief Justice William Brennan wrote in Schmerber v. California, "Search warrants are ordinarily required for searches of dwellings, and, absent an emergency, no less could be required where intrusions into the human body are concerned."
Write in and let us know what you think about this issue. Should blood tests be ordered without the consent of the person?
If you or someone that you love is struggling with drug addiction or alcoholism, please call or text us. We want to help you.
Original article URL: usnews.nbcnews.com
Photo Courtesy of: rsc.org