Alcohol Detection Bracelets Coming To Metro Counties

[IGBT]

Text

..more oh no'es for the paranoid liberal. Won't be long before they have this for all you's dopers too.



OMAHA, Neb. -- Prosecutors said a new technology coming to Douglas, Sarpy and Lancaster counties will help keep the communities safer by monitoring the alcohol intake of those convicted of alcohol-related offenses.

The secure continuous remote alcohol monitor -- or SCRAM bracelet -- monitors the alcohol intake of the person wearing it, and an infrared laser checks to make sure it's against his or her skin.

"The data from the bracelets enables criminal justice agencies to determine an individual's drinking patterns and blood-alcohol content," said Matthew Mitchell, with SCRAM.

The SCRAM bracelet is used to check whether an offender is consuming liquor. The technology will soon be available locally.

 

[conjur]

I didn't realize trolling was a valid substitute for "your own input".


Interesting.

 

[Meuge]

Originally posted by: IGBT
Text

..more oh no'es for the paranoid liberal. Won't be long before they have this for all you's dopers too.



OMAHA, Neb. -- Prosecutors said a new technology coming to Douglas, Sarpy and Lancaster counties will help keep the communities safer by monitoring the alcohol intake of those convicted of alcohol-related offenses.

The secure continuous remote alcohol monitor -- or SCRAM bracelet -- monitors the alcohol intake of the person wearing it, and an infrared laser checks to make sure it's against his or her skin.

"The data from the bracelets enables criminal justice agencies to determine an individual's drinking patterns and blood-alcohol content," said Matthew Mitchell, with SCRAM.

The SCRAM bracelet is used to check whether an offender is consuming liquor. The technology will soon be available locally.

Of course keeping someone in prison for a DUI is better... and cheaper for the society... and a more effective method of rehabilitation... :roll:

Troll.

Ban... Ban I say.

 

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: conjur
I didn't realize trolling was a valid substitute for "your own input".


Interesting.

rofl

I'd personally love to see advances in police handheld breathalyzer units and admission in court.

The whole DUI process would be much quicker if you could just have a person blow. Heck, it could be part of a regular traffic stop. License, registration, insurance, blow.

And for the naysayers, this would be legal because driving is a privledge and not a right.

 

[Todd33]

Sound good to me. As a liberal I have no love for drunks, why would I?

Nice troll though, go back to OT kid.

 

[IGBT]

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: conjur
I didn't realize trolling was a valid substitute for "your own input".


Interesting.

rofl

I'd personally love to see advances in police handheld breathalyzer units and admission in court.

The whole DUI process would be much quicker if you could just have a person blow. Heck, it could be part of a regular traffic stop. License, registration, insurance, blow.

And for the naysayers, this would be legal because driving is a privledge and not a right.

..so many people forget that driving is a privledge. And sensor technology is here to pop the dopers and drunks. Use it I say and get em off the road..and else where ie.follow up drug testing on the job.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: conjur
I didn't realize trolling was a valid substitute for "your own input".


Interesting.

rofl

I'd personally love to see advances in police handheld breathalyzer units and admission in court.

The whole DUI process would be much quicker if you could just have a person blow. Heck, it could be part of a regular traffic stop. License, registration, insurance, blow.

And for the naysayers, this would be legal because driving is a privledge and not a right.

Then why not just put those ignition locks on cars of offenders? What are the limits of sobriety for someone on parole or probation? Are they not allowed to drink at all? If they get drunk does it land them back in jail? Too many unanswered questions re: this.

 

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: conjur
Q]Then why not just put those ignition locks on cars of offenders? What are the limits of sobriety for someone on parole or probation? Are they not allowed to drink at all? If they get drunk does it land them back in jail? Too many unanswered questions re: this.

I'm all about catching the criminal, not stepping on his toes for the rest of his life.

 

[IGBT]

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: conjur
Q]Then why not just put those ignition locks on cars of offenders? What are the limits of sobriety for someone on parole or probation? Are they not allowed to drink at all? If they get drunk does it land them back in jail? Too many unanswered questions re: this.

I'm all about catching the criminal, not stepping on his toes for the rest of his life.

..parole and probation conditions are on a case by case basis. If it's DUI related the judge can prohibit alcohol..and they usually do. And can order follow up drug testing.

 

[techs]

Let's not forget that alcoholism is a disease. Many people drink because they have a compulsion to drink. It is not a weakness of character or a choice for them.
That said if you are a repeat drunk driver or habitual offender under the influence I think its a great idea.
Let's also be careful of the slippery slope. Overweight people being monitored for fat intake, etc.

 

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: techs
Let's not forget that alcoholism is a disease. Many people drink because they have a compulsion to drink. It is not a weakness of character or a choice for them.
That said if you are a repeat drunk driver or habitual offender under the influence I think its a great idea.
Let's also be careful of the slippery slope. Overweight people being monitored for fat intake, etc.

In an addiction class that I was in, I was taught that it takes roughly 9 years to become physically dependant on alcohol (addicted). 9 years of drinking isn't a disease, its a piss poor decision. Of course there is a grey line about when the crossover actually takes place, but alcoholism doesn't just happen overnight.

 

[IGBT]

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: techs
Let's not forget that alcoholism is a disease. Many people drink because they have a compulsion to drink. It is not a weakness of character or a choice for them.
That said if you are a repeat drunk driver or habitual offender under the influence I think its a great idea.
Let's also be careful of the slippery slope. Overweight people being monitored for fat intake, etc.

In an addiction class that I was in, I was taught that it takes roughly 9 years to become physically dependant on alcohol (addicted). 9 years of drinking isn't a disease, its a piss poor decision. Of course there is a grey line about when the crossover actually takes place, but alcoholism doesn't just happen overnight.

..where is the point of no return in terms of liver damage? By the time most people have been heavy drinking for nine years..the liver must be damaged. Over the years I've known people that drank them selves to death and died in their mid late 40's. End stage alcoholism is terribly ugly disease.

 

[pinion9]

Originally posted by: techs
Let's also be careful of the slippery slope. Overweight people being monitored for fat intake, etc.

Last I checked eating at McDonalds and then driving didn't result in traffic accidents and deaths. This is hardly a slippery slope. I say give the people a choice: 10 years in prison or we monitor your alcohol consumption. Your choice.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: techs
Let's also be careful of the slippery slope. Overweight people being monitored for fat intake, etc.

Last I checked eating at McDonalds and then driving didn't result in traffic accidents and deaths. This is hardly a slippery slope. I say give the people a choice: 10 years in prison or we monitor your alcohol consumption. Your choice.

Well, at least then it's a choice.

 

[dmcanally]

I know this is off topic, and I am sorry, but why is driving a privilege? My taxes help pay for roads. I know a person doesn?t absolutely need to be able to drive but there are many things a person doesn?t absolutely need that are rights.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: dmcanally
I know this is off topic, and I am sorry, but why is driving a privilege? My taxes help pay for roads. I know a person doesn?t absolutely need to be able to drive but there are many things a person doesn?t absolutely need that are rights.

One must acquire a license to drive a car. Said license can be suspended or revoked for various infractions of the law.

It's a privilege. If it was a right, there'd be no need for driver licensing.


This brings up an interesting point, though (and probably for another thread), what other products in the US are considered a "right" (we know guns, for one). What else?

 

[azazyel]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: techs
Let's also be careful of the slippery slope. Overweight people being monitored for fat intake, etc.

Last I checked eating at McDonalds and then driving didn't result in traffic accidents and deaths. This is hardly a slippery slope. I say give the people a choice: 10 years in prison or we monitor your alcohol consumption. Your choice.

Well, at least then it's a choice.

exactly, choice is the key figure.

 

[CycloWizard]

I've often thought that some readily accessible tool that was cheap enough would probably prevent a lot of drunk driving. Most of the people I know with DUIs (my home town has one of the highest alcohol use rates in the country, so it's a lot) didn't think they would be close to the limit or they wouldn't have driven. I'm not saying this is a good excuse, but it would be very beneficial for everyone if they could simply know whether or not they were really OK to drive before getting behind the wheel.

I've seen the disposable 'blow into this tube and it'll tell you your BAC', but those are expensive and disposable, not really what I was looking for. This bracelet might be a nice gift for some of my friends that like to have a couple beers and still consider driving home once the price comes down.

 

[ViRGE]

I like the idea, but the prices are painful. Each bracelet costs about $1,600 and then about $12 a day to operate. Surely these things must be coming down in price or something, $12/day/offender is pretty high.

 

[Todd33]

Originally posted by: dmcanally
I know this is off topic, and I am sorry, but why is driving a privilege? My taxes help pay for roads. I know a person doesn?t absolutely need to be able to drive but there are many things a person doesn?t absolutely need that are rights.

Gas tax pays for the roads (for the most part). If you don't drive, you don't pay taxes on gas.

 

[dahunan]

Call people dopers.. you are lame..

Rush Limbaugh is your Representative

George Bush drank so much alcohol he should definitely be called a doper .. no less people have accused him forever of using cocaine

I am sure there are plenty of others.. take your self righteous BS and shove right in your hamster cage

 

[dmcanally]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: dmcanally
I know this is off topic, and I am sorry, but why is driving a privilege? My taxes help pay for roads. I know a person doesn?t absolutely need to be able to drive but there are many things a person doesn?t absolutely need that are rights.

One must acquire a license to drive a car. Said license can be suspended or revoked for various infractions of the law.

It's a privilege. If it was a right, there'd be no need for driver licensing.


This brings up an interesting point, though (and probably for another thread), what other products in the US are considered a "right" (we know guns, for one). What else?

Well here is where I am confused. In order for me to vote I must register, if I move I have to re register. If I commit certain crimes my "right" to vote is taken away. I have to pay certain taxes and get certain licenses to use firearms. If I commit certain crimes, my "right" to own a fire arm is taken away. What is the difference between driving, voting, and owning a firearm?

Edit: I mean I need transportation just about as much as I need to own a firearm. If I lose the privilege of driving, could I just get on a horse and take a stroll down Lamar Blvd? I doubt it... I guess my point is... what gives the government to right to tell me what I am privileged with and what I have the right to do?

 

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: dmcanally

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: dmcanally
I know this is off topic, and I am sorry, but why is driving a privilege? My taxes help pay for roads. I know a person doesn?t absolutely need to be able to drive but there are many things a person doesn?t absolutely need that are rights.

One must acquire a license to drive a car. Said license can be suspended or revoked for various infractions of the law.

It's a privilege. If it was a right, there'd be no need for driver licensing.


This brings up an interesting point, though (and probably for another thread), what other products in the US are considered a "right" (we know guns, for one). What else?

Well here is where I am confused. In order for me to vote I must register, if I move I have to re register. If I commit certain crimes my "right" to vote is taken away. I have to pay certain taxes and get certain licenses to use firearms. If I commit certain crimes, my "right" to own a fire arm is taken away. What is the difference between driving, voting, and owning a firearm?

Edit: I mean I need transportation just about as much as I need to own a firearm. If I lose the privilege of driving, could I just get on a horse and take a stroll down Lamar Blvd? I doubt it... I guess my point is... what gives the government to right to tell me what I am privileged with and what I have the right to do?

The Constitution

 

[dmcanally]

Originally posted by: TallBill
The Constitution

Your reply doesn't make sense. So you are saying since the constitution doesn't explicitly give us the right to drive an automobile that it is automatically a privilege? How about the mindset that unless the constitution explicitly prohibits something it is automatically a right? Please clarify your response tall bill.

 

[TallBill]

The Bill of Rights + the rest of the amendments to the constitution.

Link

And yes, if you are not givin a right, then its either a privledge, or nothing.

Look further to your state's constitution for more rights.