<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>I Need Your Surgical Help Like I Need A Hole In The Head (Trees And Things)</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/9/3/17119/95641</link>
<description>The police ought to have the right to search for evidence as long as they have a properly executed search warrant.  All of which is fine when the evidence is all around you.  But, what about if the evidence they're looking for is inside of you?  Does the state have a right to have surgery performed on you to get at the evidence they say they need -- even if the surgery doesn't present a threat to your life?  A case in Texas &lt;a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2008/09/08/prca0908.htm">pr</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<pubDate>Fri, 5 Sep 2008 13:36:00 EST</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Sat, 6 Sep 2008 14:32:52 EST</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Shy Elf: Re: The thing that I couldn't understand about thi</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/9/3/17119/95641#5</link>
<description>The hospital operating the emergency room has to treat him without being paid first, but that doesn't mean that they aren't allowed to sue him to recover their costs afterward, or that they can't tell people that they still have to pay, even though actuall</description>
<pubDate>Sat, 6 Sep 2008 14:32:52 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>gerrymander: Re: I Need Your Surgical Help Like I Need A Hole I</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/9/3/17119/95641#4</link>
<description>That sounds about right. To take another example, the reason to operate on a drug suspect who just swallowed a bag of heroin is because &lt;i>some idiot just swallowed a bag of heroin&lt;/i>, not because law enforcement needs the heroin as evidence in a trial.</description>
<pubDate>Sat, 6 Sep 2008 12:58:50 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>skeptic: Re: The thing that I couldn't understand</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/9/3/17119/95641#3</link>
<description>I would add that aside from the desire by the police to recover the bullet to use as evidence, there is a good medical reason to remove a bullet from someone's head. &#160;If nothing else, there is the danger of lead poisoning. &#160;Foreign objects inside</description>
<pubDate>Sat, 6 Sep 2008 09:03:53 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>MayorBob: The thing that I couldn't understand about this.</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/9/3/17119/95641#2</link>
<description>The first time Bush went to the ER complaining of an accidental gunshot wound to the head, they let him go because he couldn't pay for treatment. &#160;Perhaps things are different down in Texas, but just about anywhere I've ever been, if someone shows up </description>
<pubDate>Sat, 6 Sep 2008 00:30:53 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>thefadd: Re: I Need Your Surgical Help Like I Need A Hole I</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/9/3/17119/95641#1</link>
<description>In the matter of the State versus the Suspect I feel like this is a toss up. For the most part, I would rather not see the state with the absolute right to search a person's body by any means even if safe. However, I can see there being compelling individu</description>
<pubDate>Fri, 5 Sep 2008 21:51:27 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<textInput>
<title>Search Trees And Things</title>
<description></description>
<name>string</name>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/search/</link>
</textInput>

</channel>
</rss>