Good idea, bad idea
A lady came into the store I work at today wanting to put up a flyer in our window. As we're located downtown, this is a common occurrence. What wasn't common was the flyer she wanted to place.
She went on to explain to me an idea she had. She proposed tattooing the hands of people who abuse alcohol. The tattoo would be placed in a conspicuous location on the top of the hand between the thumb and forefinger. She explained to me how many people died due to drunk driving, how they amounted to more people per year than have died in the war in Iraq. Not to mention, she went on, the children and wives who are abused and the tax-money spent on jailing alcohol-related convicts. And yes, she just said "wives," as if she didn't realize women could be alcoholics as well as men (although there do tend to be more male alcoholics, I've found that some of this is due to a social double-standard, and that abusing alcohol is somehow more socially acceptable for men).
Now, I understand this theory. The tattoos would be given to repeat abusers, who would in turn be treated as though they were underage. There just seems to be, at lease to myself, several holes in this plan. Doesn't it seem a little too "prison-camp?" People wouldn't accept it on that basis alone. Not to mention the fact that some people simply can't be tattooed due to blood-clot issues, etc. This would be the modern equivalent of the Scarlett Letter. And one that can easily covered up with gloves or makeup. It could even be construed as cruel and unusual. I mean, a lot of people are multiple offenders when it comes to murder, rape, armed robbery and the like, but no one's proposing we brand them. Bottom line, there are much better ways to control repeat offenders of alcohol-related abuse. Laws in this regard are already being created and amended, including things like more stringent probationary periods of blood and urine testing, and things like breathalyzers being installed in cars that require clean breath before allowing the car to start.
My theory is that this lady has probably lost a loved one to a drunk driver, or something similar. And while I can sympathize, being a recovering alcoholic myself and knowing what we're capable of, I just don't think this can work. Don't get me wrong, I totally agree that laws protecting people against repeat abusers need to be very strict, but some things can go overboard. I'd like to know what other people think, so please post a comment if you have an opinion.
She went on to explain to me an idea she had. She proposed tattooing the hands of people who abuse alcohol. The tattoo would be placed in a conspicuous location on the top of the hand between the thumb and forefinger. She explained to me how many people died due to drunk driving, how they amounted to more people per year than have died in the war in Iraq. Not to mention, she went on, the children and wives who are abused and the tax-money spent on jailing alcohol-related convicts. And yes, she just said "wives," as if she didn't realize women could be alcoholics as well as men (although there do tend to be more male alcoholics, I've found that some of this is due to a social double-standard, and that abusing alcohol is somehow more socially acceptable for men).
Now, I understand this theory. The tattoos would be given to repeat abusers, who would in turn be treated as though they were underage. There just seems to be, at lease to myself, several holes in this plan. Doesn't it seem a little too "prison-camp?" People wouldn't accept it on that basis alone. Not to mention the fact that some people simply can't be tattooed due to blood-clot issues, etc. This would be the modern equivalent of the Scarlett Letter. And one that can easily covered up with gloves or makeup. It could even be construed as cruel and unusual. I mean, a lot of people are multiple offenders when it comes to murder, rape, armed robbery and the like, but no one's proposing we brand them. Bottom line, there are much better ways to control repeat offenders of alcohol-related abuse. Laws in this regard are already being created and amended, including things like more stringent probationary periods of blood and urine testing, and things like breathalyzers being installed in cars that require clean breath before allowing the car to start.
My theory is that this lady has probably lost a loved one to a drunk driver, or something similar. And while I can sympathize, being a recovering alcoholic myself and knowing what we're capable of, I just don't think this can work. Don't get me wrong, I totally agree that laws protecting people against repeat abusers need to be very strict, but some things can go overboard. I'd like to know what other people think, so please post a comment if you have an opinion.
posted by ET at 3/12/2007 01:31:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home