TexasCHLforum.com

Reading Police Chief William Heim told the Reading Eagle the federal agencies are trying to see what can be done about crashes and injuries, and the swabs were not to get DNA samples but to test for the presence of prescription drugs. He said police were there for site security only and did not pull drivers over or ask questions.

"In the grand scheme of things, I think it's a pretty innocuous and minor issue," Heim said.

texanhttp://www.star-telegram.com/2013/11/20/5356114/fort-worth-police-chief-apologizes.html?rh=1joker wrote:

mojo84 wrote:There's a difference when the reason for the stop is to help the flow of traffic or safety than when it is to screen for alcohol without the person/subject knowing or to take blood or saliva samples. Do you really not see the difference?

By the way, I have not called for anyone's job over this. There are either forms of discipline that may be more appropriate.

If it was so right, why did the chief acknowledge it was wrong?

Where did the chief say it was wrong? He offered an appaulogy and said they would look into it. Unfortunately that is often why an agency won't say they are sorry because people assume that means they did something wrong.

"We are reviewing the actions of all police personnel involved to ensure that FWPD policies and procedures were followed," he said. "We apologize if any of our drivers and citizens were offended or inconvenienced by the NHTSA National Roadside Survey."

texanjoker wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:

gigag04 wrote: I was hoping 4 would come up.

I was following this thread hoping that the LEOs in this forum would unanimously condemn the actions of the LEOs in the story.

Anygunanywhere

I think I have been pretty clear lets see facts of wrong doing. I won't condemn somebody based on a news article nor jump on the bandwagon without proof.

You should actually be glad we call for facts. It would be a whole lot easier at work to make decisions based on limited information vs. doing a complete investigation to uncover the truth. When I worked child abuse you can be sure all those accused of some pretty heinous crimes were very thankful I am meticulous when it comes to wanting to know factual information vs hearsay. (A news story is hearsay.) In many instances I cleared people that otherwise would have been charged with a crime.

chasfm11 wrote:

texanjoker wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:Where is the ACLU when you need 'em? Where is the free press? Where are the attorneys looking for somebody to sue? Where are the people running for public office? When is it going to stop raining and warm up?

That is a good point. The ACLU comes out where there is a civil rights violation. Maybe their lack of action says something. I would hope that the ACLU looks into an incident vs. jumping on the bandwagon based on one news story to see if there is any actual violation vs media hype. .

The current study is 60 locations, 7,500 "volunteers" at something like 125 per event. Hardly a singular media hyped event. Here was a similar event in Alabama with a similar reaction - and another news source.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/19/us/drug-s ... index.html

For me the ACLU has a political agenda, not a mission to protect peoples rights. Sometimes those two coincide but not always. I agree with the causes that they take up less than 50% of the time. I don't expect them to take up this one.

I really have no issue if people want to participate in a Federal survey. More power to them Put up a sign and ask for volunteers. But to insure that the study is random, that won't work. People who might volunteer also might fall into a particular group, invalidating the survey sampling. So targets are selected based on the numbers and the power of the police is used to help "persuade" them.

I am a conspiracy theorist. I admit it. Then again, this year's information releases suggests that there is substance behind at least some of the concerns. I belong to one of the groups that was targeted by the IRS - that is real to me. I felt vindicated when the news was leaked that the nudie scanners COULD record results after vehement denials by the TSA. I won't belabor Fast and Furious. In short, there are very few of the Federal agencies that haven't been found to be cooking the books, manipulating data or outright violating the Constitution. Pick one and I'll send the information about . An people are willing to give up their DNA "anonymously" to a Federal agency? Again, more power to them but I'm not doing it and I'm not going to stand for a process that could use at least implied police force to try to make me. The time to fight over it is now, not when I'm along side the ride, surrounded officers who believe that I'm not complying with their commands fast enough. I've seen how that can turn out.

The job of the police is to deal with people who are exhibiting criminal behavior. The more that the police are called to act upon law abiding citizens, the more likely it is for a regrettable incident to occur.

gigag04 wrote:Any other articles on this?


I'm late to the party as all the "govt is out to get me" threads kind of run together so I passed over this one. The original link isn't working, and I haven't seen much else on the story.