Let's get one thing straight: Drunken driving is a terrible societal ailment that yields immeasurable risks and consequences to those who drive drunk and to those innocents who share the roads with them. There is little in this country that has affected more people or hurt more innocents than drunken driving. It is an issue that we as a society must address. Consequently, Arizona legislators are currently trying to come up with new, "innovative" ways to curb drunken driving.
This week, State Rep. Linda Gray and Sen. Slade Mead will debate their new ideas with fellow legislators on the issue. Both endorse a new policy of trying to shame and embarrass Arizonans from drinking and driving. Gray wants the state to pay for the publication of convicted drunken drivers' names in the newspaper. Mead wants anyone convicted of a DUI to be forced into using a bright, yellow license plate for one year. It's something straight out of "The Scarlet Letter," an anachronism of indignity in our age of technology and rule of law.
A similar program is being tried in the state of Ohio, but it is much too soon for there to be evidence that it has had any positive effect. Arizona's proposed law, though, differs from Ohio's. The red and yellow plates are used voluntarily by Ohio DUI convicts as a means of getting their suspended driver's license back in a shorter period of time. Mead's plan calls for the new plates to be mandatory for one year for anyone who receives a DUI.
Much criticism of Ohio's policy (and of Arizona's proposed law) turns on the fact that it unjustly imparts embarrassment and shame onto people other than the DUI convicts. Anyone who drives or rides in a yellow-plated car innocently faces the sneers and curses of passersby on the street. A DUI convict's spouse or teenage child who also drives the car would be forced to endure the same shame as the person who committed the DUI. Is that fair? But if the embarrassment technique isn't the answer, then what should be done? What can the legislators do to make driving in Arizona safer?
Jonathan Adkins, a spokesman for the national Governors Highway Safety Association, said, "The best thing the state of Arizona can do is to pass a primary seat belt law." Earlier this session, our Legislature rejected a law that would have allowed police officers to ticket a driver for not wearing a seat belt. Making seat belts the law has been proven to reduce the number of general auto fatalities as well as fatalities from DUI-related accidents.
Of course, wearing seat belts does nothing to actually reduce drunken driving. This is where using new ideas and techniques becomes important.
Instead of trying to humiliate people, Arizona's lawmakers should consider using technology and public transportation to curtail drunken driving. The first step would be to promote the mass transit systems within the state to provide those who drink a means to get home without driving or paying for an expensive cab ride home. Few drunken people are willing to spend the money for a cab ride, but a dollar or two to take a bus or train makes it easier and cheaper for them to get home without driving.
But people in Arizona seemingly never see such positive sides of expanding mass transit; and even with a better system, people will still drive drunk, so something else must be done. Arizona lawmakers should look harder at using ignition interlock devices in the cars of those convicted of a DUI. These devices require the driver to exhale into an alcohol detection machine before the engine will start. These machines currently cost about $1,000 to buy and install.
Anyone convicted of a single extreme DUI or a repeat offender of a regular DUI could have one of these devices installed using the money from his or her own fines. This would prevent those at risk of driving drunk from being able to do so while not resorting to shame and indignity. And no one else will be forced to share the punishment for another's DUI mistake.
Brett Berry is a regional development sophomore. He can be reached at letters@wildcat.arizona.edu.