This one has me seething mad! Mothers Against Drunk Drivers has come up with a diabolic way to prevent any adult in the US from enjoying a glass of wine in a bar, with dinner at a restaurant, or at a wine tasting or wine festival. This organization will not be satisfied until anyone who has consumed any alcohol can be arrested for "driving while impaired," aka "DUI" in many states. How do they plan to do this? By getting legislation passed to make Ignition Interlock Devices mandatory on all vehicles in the US, and by getting the maximum blood-alcohol concentration (BAC) set between .02 and .04 on these devices. This means that if you have a glass of wine at a restaurant with dinner, you willl not be able to drive home because the interlock will prevent your car from starting.
Towards this end MADD, through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), has launched a 5-year campaign for universal interlocks. "Contracting with the Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety (ACTS), the agency has budgeted $10,000,000 to solicit research and development on the widespread use of in-vehicle technology to prevent alcohol-impaired driving."
Why am I mad about this? Because the facts just don't support the notion that "impaired" drivers are a danger. "Since 1997, the average BAC of a driver in a fatal crash has remained relatively stable at 0.18 percent—225 percent of the legal limit." And while MADD has succeeded in getting the legal limit for BAC reduced from .10 to .08, there is no evidence that the lower BAC rate has reduced fatality rates. In fact, "while drunk driving fatalities declined over the last 30 years, speeding and distracted driving deaths have steadily increased. And now negligent driving is the main cause of deaths on American highways."
MADD is no longer interested in traffic safety. The goal of this organization has become to make "impaired driving" illegal. I say that any organization that says it is interested in traffic safety should call for mandatory speed governors and technology to disable cell phones when a car is moving. Here are some other ways that drivers are distracted while driving: using a GPS navigation system, searching for stations on satellite radio, or programming an MP3 device. Why aren't these distractions being addressed? What about people who drive while sleep-deprived? And here's a radical idea: make automatic transmissions illegal. When you drive a car with a manual transmission, like I do, you have to concentrate on what you are doing, and you have to use both hands!
I'm so mad about this that I am seriously considering founding a counter-organization. I'll call it "DAMM"--Drunks Against Mad Mothers. Will you join it?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Couldn't agree more about the zealotry of those associated with MADD. We all feel sorry for those that have lost loved ones due to accidents involving drunk drivers, but MADD's efforts to virtually eliminate social drinking altogether is tantamount to promoting the revival of prohibition.
What really gauls me is the implied "immorality" of driving under the influence. Is it "immoral" to drive while texting, or to drive while sleep-deprived?
I love it..DAMM - sign me up. Some people can be so extreme in their beliefs that they go to measures like this one.
Great article. But face it folks it is not about safety it is about money. MADD makes money by claiming they are resolving deaths, courts are making money with the fines. MADD supplies its own unsubstantiated figures and has never been willing to prove they are factual. I also agree that if driving with a .08 BAC is illegal, and they are going to ruin people's lives over it, then it should also be illegal to drive while using a phone. The justice system is NOT JUST.
MADD receives a kick back on every impaired driver arrested as a part of the fine you have to PAY MADD money to go to their seminar. If they lower the limit it only provides them more income. I agree with the last post. It is all about money.
Post a Comment