Drunk License Holder in Friendswood Arrested

[Tireshred]

I signed up to receive the Friendswood Police Activity report by email every week, sometimes boring, sometimes not. Here's one that's in today's edition. I'm supposing license to be a CHL. There is no author to quote on the email.

"Nov. 18 (4:10 p.m.) James Taylor Saunders, 57, of Friendswood, was charged with DWI and Unlawful Carrying of a Weapon by a License Holder. Officers were alerted to an intoxicated man leaving the Friendswood Public Library. The caller described the man and the vehicle and told police that he had just pulled into the Salem Square Apartments parking lot. An officer located the suspect vehicle and Saunders, who was standing behind the vehicle drinking a beer. The officer approached Saunders, who warned the officer that he was armed. The officer retrieved a semi-automatic pistol from Saunder's waistband and another from his pants pocket. Saunders exhibited signs of intoxication and refused to perform any field sobriety tests. He registered .264 on a breath test."

[RoyGBiv]

Woo-Hoo... .264.!! Driving and carrying concealed...

[surprise_i'm_armed]

Goodbye plastic....it was nice knowing you for while.

SIA

[texanron]

Wow!! .264 at 4:10 in the afternoon. Dude was gettting his Friday drinking binge started early. I never thought of the library as a place to hang out after drinking a beer or 12.

[i8godzilla]

.264? I do not think I would have been able to stand. Even if I could stand, not sure that I could drink another.

[CC Italian]

Doesn't surprise me at all! Sooner or later a person with unsound judgement will get through the system. My guess is that this guy made it under the radar but has had a severe alcohol problem for years. .264 is extremely high, my guess is he is an alcoholic. I don't think I could drive if mine was that high. I would always here from people in college that they could drive with 4-5 beers, just stupid! This doesn't mean that their BAC was below .08, it just means they have built up a tolerance like any other drug. I also read somewhere that Harris county has one of the highest if not the highest DWI rates in the country. Again, no surprise with sprawling suburbs and minimal public transportation or cabs for that matter. People take there lives and the lives of others in their hands with little or no regard. CHl, firearm or no firearm this guy drove around with his two ton bullet and luckily no one was hurt. He is not the first and won't be the last!

[CC Italian]

I personally wish they would do zero tolerance, no refusal all the time. You have a greater chance of getting killed by a drunk driver then by a violent armed criminal. DWI should be an automatic 10 year suspension of your license, NO exceptions. Fines need to be higher also. We need schools and roads fixed, these people should pay more. I think a life is worth more then 2,000 dollars for the first offense. What about you guys? Call it a stupid tax! I have met people who have had several and still drive. Ridiculous!

[fickman]

I personally wish they would do zero tolerance, no refusal all the time. You have a greater chance of getting killed by a drunk driver then by a violent armed criminal. DWI should be an automatic 10 year suspension of your license, NO exceptions. Fines need to be higher also. We need schools and roads fixed, these people should pay more. I think a life is worth more then 2,000 dollars for the first offense. What about you guys? Call it a stupid tax! I have met people who have had several and still drive. Ridiculous!

I agree with your outrage about drunken drivers, but disagree with no-refusal search and seizure without probable cause and a warrant. DWI laws cover intoxicants that are non-alcohol related and thus much more subjective. . . like prescription meds where somebody could have an innocent, inadvertent, unexpected interaction that isn't quantifiable. Also, there's a lot of ways a no-refusal law could be abused in ways where we end up as a less-free society. We must be presumed innocent until the government can prove otherwise.

Zero tolerance, rigid legislation always sounds like a better plan than it ends up being. See our public schools for an example. It's better to build in guidelines and allow for prosecutors, judges, and juries to use discretion on a case-by-case basis in my opinion.

[CC Italian]

Either way non refusal is not enough! I live in a highly populated suburb north of Houston and its ridiculous how many DWIs they have a month. All the figures are available through local constables in our precinct. As for a warrant, they do get one! They have judges on call in mobile units to sign them if the officer has a reason to believe the person is intoxicated through his observations and refuses a BAC test through a breathalyzer. They then administer an on site blood test for the most accurate reading. This is how bad the problem is where I live! They don't just pull anybody over! They must have reasonable cause to pull you over!

Sorry for all the exclamation points but I am really trying to get my point across. They are not randomly pulling people over because they feel like it.

[fickman]

They are not randomly pulling people over because they feel like it.

. . . but what's to stop them?

I want to reiterate that I'm very pro-LEO and very anti-DWI. (Although I don't agree that LEOs should be doing blood draws.) I know DWIs are a serious problem, but making it easier to circumvent our rights to privacy and due process aren't the solution. That doesn't mean I have a good alternative, though.

I definitely support mandatory sentences for alcohol or illicit drug-related DWIs that result in injury or death. . . and I don't think the current penalties are stiff enough.

Regarding the OP, we're all crossing our fingers that CHLers will behave and stay out of the media, but the longer the program goes and the more popular it becomes, the percentages start to say that we're due for some high-profile incidents. It makes me sick to think about the power one reckless individual could have to change the course of public opinion on the matter. I doubt I'm alone in hoping a few people in my class wouldn't pass the test. . . the questions some of them asked in class showed they just didn't "get it".

[Oldgringo]

I personally wish they would do zero tolerance, no refusal all the time. You have a greater chance of getting killed by a drunk driver then by a violent armed criminal. DWI should be an automatic 10 year suspension of your license, NO exceptions. Fines need to be higher also. We need schools and roads fixed, these people should pay more. I think a life is worth more then 2,000 dollars for the first offense. What about you guys? Call it a stupid tax! I have met people who have had several and still drive. Ridiculous!

Somebody get a rope...and a 12 pak!

[CC Italian]

Don't get me wrong. I love my liquid bread with a kick. It just gets me ticked when adults act like little children and have no regard for my friends and loved ones and have to be put in time out because they have no common sense. Good beer is one of my guilty pleasures but I refuse to carry a weapon or drive a vehicle while consuming it. Not because it is illegal but because it is selfish to endanger others because of my vice. Most people understand and get this but we all know there are those few bad apples who act selfishly and do not care that they hurt others. At least until they get caught or hurt someone else. Then they are sorry!

Ok rant is done. I feel better, time for a Saint Arnold's.

[alvins]

ah yes another brainiac who lives at salem square apartments aka satans square apartments.lol

[Originalist]

Just because someone fluffs up a newspaper add and labels something "no refusal" does not circumvent regularly required legal standards..... i.e. probable cause! As a NHTSA Certified SFST Practitioner I can tell you that after my observations, initial contact and pre arrest screening (and if you refuse it doesn't mean you get a pass either) I can certify to any judge probable cause to believe you 1. were in a public place, 2. were operating a motor vehicle and 3. met the legal definition of intoxicated (either BAC 0.080 or not having normal use of your physical/mental faculties). Once I articulate probable cause I can obtain a warrant to search for evidence..... This happens EVERYTIME a warrant is obtained and can happen whenever/where ever..... SPinning something into good PR is a bonus!

Police must ALWAYS articulate PC to obtain a warrant, there is no special lax in rules to create a NO PC weekend.....

[thatguy]

.264 WOW! I volunteered for our local PD to be a designated drinker and by the end I was pushing a .15 (legal limit is .080 and I was HAMMERED TOAST.

Free booze aside, I dont think I will volunteer next year!