I think it is. Why anyone would be bent out of shape about it is a little beyond me. The article mentions concern over odors of spilled alcohol in the car setting off the flashlight. Two points: I have handled one of these units in a training environment but not in the field. My understanding is that it requires a fairly close proximity to the odor and a blow over or across the sensor therefore lingering odors in the vehicle would not be detected unless they are pretty darn strong and there is a breeze that blows perfectly over the very small sensor on the unit. It's meant to be an up close and personal device. Secondly, even if the flashlight detected the odor of alcohol in the vehicle it wouldn't take more than a few minutes to determine whether additional DUI investigation is necessary or if the driver is sober. The intrusion is minimal and allowed under current constitutional law. The flashlight is not determinative of DUI but is merely an initial screening device. Probable cause is still required for an arrest (but not a detention) and that would be either developed or dispelled during further investigation with other investigation techniques.

A main point is whether a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy in his or her breath or odor. The answer is no, not in the circumstances of being a driver on a public road.

__________________