MADD stamping her feet again!

[Guest guest]

From something called www.nannyculture.com:

-------------------------------

Driven to Distraction:

Hang Up on MADD's Call for .08

Why is talking on a car phone like driving a Corvette? Statistically,

both make you more likely to die in a wreck. While perfectly

acceptable behaviors, both are also connected to the current campaign

to redefine " drunk driving. "

According to a study in the New England Journal of Medicine, the risk

of getting into an accident while driving and talking on a cell phone

is equal to driving with a blood alcohol content (BAC) of .10 percent

(the current DWI arrest level in most states). The crusade to

establish .08 BAC as the uniform " drunk " arrest level would have you

in jail for behavior statistically safer than using a car phone.

Will the .08 BAC proposal result in the arrest of social drinkers?

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, a

120-lb. woman would be subject to arrest, jail, loss of license,

fines, etc., after drinking just two six-ounce glasses of wine over a

two-hour period. The past president of MADD agrees, saying a

national .08 BAC standard will be a shot across the bow for " light

drinkers " as well as others. All this while the average DWI fatality

comes in at twice that level.

According to traffic safety experts, this new definition of " drunk "

would automatically redefine (and thus greatly enlarge) the drunk

driving " problem, " but it wouldn't do anything to solve it. That

point was driven home just this week when Virginia's Department of

Motor Vehicles reported that drunk driving deaths dramatically

increased in that " .08 " state, while land - a " .10 " state -

reported a dramatic decline in drunk driving deaths over the same

period.

So why is MADD pushing for a law that doesn't work? Professional fund-

raisers for MADD will benefit from this focus on social drinking.

Expect the alarming " increase " in drunk driving to keep money flowing

from private donors, as well as big business. (With annual payroll

and fringe benefits at MADD in excess of $9 million, you've got to

keep the cash coming.)

And this brings us to that Corvette. General Motors has donated huge

sums of money to MADD, pledging just this week (Sept. 6) an

additional $2.5 million over the next five years. They even placed

one of their chief lawyers into the Chairman role for MADD's Board of

Directors. Why is GM so generous with its money and people? By

cozying up to MADD, GM insulates its own traffic safety record

problem from MADD's attacks.

While the Corvette is a beautiful vehicle, it is also one of the most

potentially dangerous pieces of machinery on the road. The Corvette

is capable of reaching speeds of 170 miles per hour. Zero to 60 in a

screaming 4.7 seconds! In 1997, an insurance industry study found the

Corvette death rate to be as much as 20 times higher than that of the

safest models.

Other high-powered GM cars, the Camaro and the Firebird, registered

the two highest driver death rates among passenger cars in another

study released last month. Not exactly a role model for traffic

safety. GM will sell these road rockets to anybody with credit. If

highway safety is the goal, shouldn't GM check driving records before

handing over the keys? Should MADD, with its stated concern for

highway fatalities, be in bed with these folks?

It's obvious the entire .08 BAC campaign has become exaggerated and

distorted, and the attack on " dangerous " social drinkers is foolishly

off the mark. Every serious traffic safety expert knows the campaign

doesn't tackle the problem of alcohol abuse. The U.S. General

Accounting Office, remarking on the government's .08 BAC evidence,

charitably called it " overstated. "

As with most such movements, truth and the facts are the first

victims.

Demands for a .04 BAC arrest level (and lower) are already being

considered in some states. Worse yet, by tightening the noose on the

majority of social drinkers, we've taken some of the heat off a tiny

but deadly minority of real alcohol abusers who drive.

No one would suggest that simply outlawing Corvettes or banning car

phones is realistic. The responsible use of any car, any cell phone,

and any prudent amount of beer, wine, and liquor does not create

societal problems. It's the abuse of these products that can kill.

The macho speed demon with 20 points on his license should be yanked

out of his Corvette. The self-important businesswoman yakking on her

cell phone in traffic must learn that road safety is a greater

priority. And the chronic drunk caught behind the wheel should be

arrested, punished and treated for alcoholism.

But if we continue to broadly target social drinkers, fast cars and

cell phones -- without a laser-like focus on the real product

abusers -- we'll never accomplish what we all want…safer roads.

----------------------------------

And AA will have its hand out to bring 'problem' social drinkers into

its fold and tell them they are alcoholics because they got a DUI.

The tyranny continues and grows.

jan