Exactly. It would be no more onerous than a bartender carding someone to be sure they're old enough to drink. Imagine that, preventing people with a problem from accessing alcohol. It's almost like preventing people who can't control their tempers from accessing firearms. In either case, you exercise the prevention AFTER someone demonstrates they have a problem, not because you think they MIGHT have a problem.Joe and I had this discussion. I know people that had DUI's. In almost all cases, they are coming from a public place where alcohol is served which is usually the bar.
Bar people are very strange. They are more addicted to the bar environment than they are the alcohol itself. They get busted, quit drinking for a week or two, but that mad desire overcomes them. They go to the bar and only drink a soda. After a week of that, they only have one drink, then two. Before you know it, they are right back to where they started.
So I told Joe the way to reduce the amount of DUI's is to have your license marked. If you have a marked license, you are not allowed in any establishment that serves alcohol even if you are not drinking yourself. If you eliminate the attraction to public drinking, you reduce the amount of DUI's because you break this bar habit of theirs. To be honest, it would also be the biggest deterrent from getting drunk at the bar because these people can't live without it.
Joe claimed it could never work because the establishments that serve alcohol would never comply with inspecting all drivers licenses for a marked one. Okay, then the bar gets fined if busted. Very few people get drunk at home and then decide to get in the car and ride around. It would work.
Liberals don't like solutions, they like pandering to the problem instead.