From: John Woodgate
Subject: Re: Breathalyzer Ignition Interlocks - Big Brother at his best!
Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 22:05:10 +0000
Organization: JMWA Electronics Consultancy
Reply-To: John Woodgate
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 22:42:37 +0000 (UTC)
X-Newsreader: Turnpike (32) Version 4.01 <5Z8C9wtxbnpWyFnyfFzqmVF739>
I read in sci.electronics.design that Michael Painter
wrote (in ) about 'Breathalyzer Ignition Interlocks -
Big Brother at his best!', on Sat, 4 Jan 2003:
>Protecting people from drunks is no more illegal than protecting them from
>any other danger that the individual has no control over.
I really don't think that is the point. It's about the allocation of
resources to what is a minority cause of fatalities, and in many places
a very small minority cause. More lives would be saved if other causes
of accidents were more diligently addressed.
It's also about whether the punishment fits the crime, a principle that
the authorities lost sight of about 10 years ago. Here, the fine for
paid-for parking in an official car-park, BUT OUTSIDE THE WHITE LINES is
more than the fine for running a red light (first offence). Similarly, a
ten-year ban for being over the limit must prompt some drivers to try to
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!