SCRAM Bracelets, Money, and Big Brother
From the Joliet Herald News, “SCRAM Bracelet Saves More Than Money”:
David Talarico's business features a high-tech bracelet that has the potential to save tax dollars and -- more importantly -- lives.
The devices, called SCRAM (Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitor), detect alcohol use. The bracelets are worn on the ankle by people who have abused alcohol and are in trouble with the law. Instead of going to jail, offenders wear SCRAM bracelets that monitor their bodies for alcohol 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
OK. So that’s what the SCRAM bracelet is, and yes, it is being used in Austin as well as Illinois.
For folks released on bond for a DWI 2nd offense or higher that are required by statute to install an Ignition Interlock Device, SCRAM sometimes makes sense. It allows them access to many vehicles, instead of just one, and still fulfills the requirement that ‘some machine is making sure they didn’t consume alcohol’ before starting a car. Some folks can’t be tied down to just one vehicle.
However, it is definitely more not less expensive than an Ignition Interlock. [Posting on a Sunday night; I’ll try to get some exact figures on that soon.]
The article continues:
Though some may think the bracelets are intrusive, Talarico, president of Alcohol Monitors of Illinois Inc., thinks they're the wave of the future.
"People call this 'Big Brother,' but the reality is, these are for the people who need a big brother to help them along," he said. "Clearly if somebody can't stay sober on their own, they'll have to go to jail."
The first paragraph sets up a false dichotomy between something being “intrusive” vs. “being the wave of the future”.
And I just want to be clear on this: Talarico, based on your quote, you are at least admitting that it is Big Brother. Right? It’s just that Big Brother is or can be a good thing – that’s your point.
The article ends with an interesting quote from Talarico. I’m just going to quote it, and not comment. It’s one of those “no comment necessary” situations:
He believes the SCRAM bracelet is an important weapon to fight alcohol abuse.
Being in this business, you see both sides of it," he said. "I see SCRAM almost like the war on terror. You never know what you're preventing, but if you believe in what you're doing you know you're doing good."
OK, I said I wouldn’t comment, but I’ve got an overwhelming urge to repeat that last line:
You never know what you're preventing, but if you believe in what you're doing you know you're doing good.
I don't know if this is going to work. It's like house arrest.
I was forced to wear the SCRAM bracelet in addition to having ignition interlock in Travis Co. after being arrested for a second DWI while being on probation for the first. It costs about $75 to be put on and $12 per day to wear it. I felt it had many flaws. It left me with a horrible rash which is still visible on my calf despite having it removed about 6 months ago. The woman who installed it said it was common to have irritation. It also left my ankle on that foot very bruised to the point that it was extremely painful to walk. Then, I was brought into court due to having a positive response, although it had been at least 4 months since I had consumed any alcohol. The judge had attended a conference on SCRAM in which she learned false positives were very common, so she gave me the benefit of the doubt. However, I was working in a restaurant that had cameras the entire time my alcohol report had spiked, so I could prove I was sober. I was still forced to quit my job which left me with no way to pay the almost $400 per month fee. So I understand it is a deterrent to drinking, but I believe it is cruel and unusual punishment.