After reading this story, I’ve become conflicted. Apparently car makers are considering placing blood alcohol monitors in new cars so that they will not start if the driver is impaired. I actually find this part pretty cool:
One of them uses sensors embedded in the steering wheel or gear shift that can measure blood-alcohol levels through the skin — much as an exercise machine can measure a heart rate.
Now, on one hand, people killed by drunk drivers would diminish drastically. The numbers wouldn’t fall right away as not everyone will buy new cars the first year the technology is introduced. But eventually, hopefully by the time my future kids are learning the ropes of the road, alcohol related road deaths would be a thing of the past. On the other hand, I’m nervous about any invasion of privacy, even an intrusion as benevolent as this one.
Right now, Canada has these “interlocking devices” on the cars of convicted drunk drivers.
The driver blows into the device, which registers his blood-alcohol level. If he registers above a set mark, usually 0.02 or 0.04 per cent, the vehicle won’t start.
It makes sense. But is it constitutional to force every citizen to use these machines? Don’t we have a right to get into our own car without blowing into a tube? I’m going to guess such a measure would not stand up under its first constitutional challenge, which I’m positive will happen immediately after the devices are put in. It begs a very good question; will people sacrifice their personal freedom for the country’s greater good?
