« Woman accused of severing parrot's foot is found dead |
Today
| Two-alarm fire burns in three-story building in Providence »
January 4, 2008
Update: Bill calls for monitoring drunken drivers' sweat
If a bill in the General Assembly becomes Rhode Island law, judges would have discretion to see that someone who drinks and drives could not simply sweat off a conviction.
Instead, the sentencing judge would have the option of requiring a person to wear a monitoring device that randomly tests the person's sweat for alcohol content. The proposal would apply to a person who is found guilty, pleads guilty or pleads no contest to driving under the influence or driving while intoxicated.
"The device shall have the capability of sending the results in real time to the monitor of the device regardless of the wearer's location," the legislation says. The device would alert the probation office that the person is drinking alcohol while under the provisions of a court sentence.
Rep. Joseph M. McNamara, D-Warwick, who is the bill's prime sponsor, said in an interview his main motivation for introducing the bill is to improve highway safety. It would also give judges another tool to use, at their discretion, in sentencing someone. And, he said, it could help people struggling with substance abuse, allowing them "to be able to regain their licensing" after suspension.
Currently, McNamara said, a law on the books says a judge can order someone to use an ignition interlock device, in which a person blows into it to prove he or she hasn't been drinking. But the problem with that is a person can conceivably ask a family member or other person to breathe into it for him or her, McNamara said.
The bill was introduced yesterday, day three of the legislative session, and has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee. The person wearing the device would be responsible for costs associated with wearing and monitoring it.
-- projo.com staff writer Michael P. McKinney
Posted by Mike McKinney
at 6:30 PM | Permalink
Jerry | January 5, 2008 8:02 AM link
Glen | January 5, 2008 11:56 PM link
Post a comment
Please be civil. Vicious comments, personal attacks and profanity won't be published. Name and email are required; email address will not publish.
I think government is attempting to go way to far. Just because someone is arrested and convicted of drunk driving, is not a reason to monitor someone on 24/7 basis. Driving was the only offense, not consuming alcohol.