M.A.D.D. seeks tighter drunk driving laws

Here are some alcohol related stats from 2005

Overview
Alcohol-related motor vehicle crashes kill someone every 31 minutes and nonfatally injure someone every two minutes(NHTSA 2006).But there are effective measures that can be taken to prevent injuries and deaths from impaired driving.


http://www.edgarsnyder.com/auto-accident/drunk-driving/statistics.html

http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/factsheets/drving.htm

 

There would've been shortages if I pulled that one.

 

That says it all, right there. That is the mentality of the neo-Prohibitionists at MADD. Whether or not they'll admit it, their goal is a return to alcohol prohibition.

Please never breed under any circumstances.

PS--I don't drink.

 

I haven't lost any children, thank God. I've only seen enough over the years to know I never want that to happen to me and my family. I did have a very close 7 year old nephew who was killed by a drunk behind the wheel, and several friends over the years. Drunk drivers know no bounds in relations when they KILL someone.

Yes most states do force a blood test when involved in a fatality. Another thing to remember is an average persons Blood Alcohol Level will drop several percentage points per hour. This means that if his level was below the limit, he may very well have been over the limit 45 minutes to an hour before that test. Alcohol leaves the body through the lungs. You don't sweat it out or pee it out as some make think. That's only the accumulated liquid. Alcohol eveporates when warmed by the blood and escapes through the lungs because of blood contact and oxygen exchange in the lower lung. Pour pure alcohol on a warm sidewalk and watch it dissappear. That's why you smell it on someones breath. The longer you wait, the less alcohol in your system as it evaporates from your body.

As for the anger and grief of a mother, and moving on and letting go; that's the difference between YOU and HER. People are different and face things differently. Emotion, grief, saddness, fear are all handled differently by all people. Doesn't make it any easier. Some people deal with it in different ways. It's still a loss. Maybe you're just stronger than she is.

Yes many juries will convict if the evidence presented shows that the person was impaired. Now I wasn't there of course, but evidently a jury saw enough evidence of alcohol level and impairment to convict. As for the girl speeding; it may have been a contributing factor, but when a person is alcohol impaired, that prevents them from operating a vehicle with normal judgement. Who knows, speeding or not, that accident probably wouldn't have occurred without someone being impaired behind the wheel. People speed all of the time without accidents, but it may have been a contributing factor. That could be the reason he only got 5 years, instead of the standard 15 to 20 for vehicular neglegent homicide.

As for courts suspending the license, there may have been a law in that state that allows the courts to do that under certain circumstances. However, the initial suspension of a license with a DWI is generally performed by the issuing state. Not the court.

As far as my judging him, I judge ANYONE who gets behind the wheel after they have been drinking. I have the right to judge a person who deliberately endangers my life or my families'. And it was done deliberately. He drove there, knowing he was going to drink and had to get home. He knew while he was drinking, he was going to have to drive home. THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR IT. You can sugar coat it and dress it up like a Barbie Doll, but it's still wrong, immoral and it endangers the lives of others. When someone drinks and gets behind the wheel, I don't care if it's half the legal limit, you will be somewhat impaired, and should not be driving a weapon when you are not in complete control, PERIOD!!! I've seen people who were at half the legal limit and couldn't stand up, and people twice the limit, who "seemed" sober. Regardless of limits and shoulda, coulda, woulda, and almost, it endangers lives and kills people everyday.

Look at the war in Vietnam and how many people we lost. Everyone talks about what a tragedy it was to lose so many people, and it was. BUT WE LOSE THE SAME NUMBER OF PEOPLE EVERY YEAR TO DRUNK DRIVERS, AS WE LOST IN THE ENTIRE VIETNAM WAR. That is a tragedy. And there is no excuse.

 

You are wrong on that. I know many people from MADD over the years and have lectured at meetings. Many of them do drink alcohol. But they do it at home, or with a designated driver who does not drink at all. I know because I've been out with some of them. Many people are driven to the association of MADD because of their losses. As I said previously, many of them have lost children, parents, siblings, or spouses. A loss like that can change folks and they will seek healing. Many people will work to better a situation so it doesn't happen to someone else during their healing process. MADD is not against alcohol, they are against those who drink it, drive a vehicle and kill or mame someone. That's it. They are not a prohibition group or a bunch or bible thumpers. They know prohobition doesn't work. Their biggest activism is education about drunk driving, political action to change DWI laws and forcing the courts to do their job according to the law, instead of a revolving door to go kill again.

 

I'm all for getting drunks off the road, but I'll be ###### if some untrained cops are sticking even the most stinking blind drunk with a needle to draw blood out on the dusty highway. I'm sure somebody one day will be seriously injured or infected.

 

OK, first of all there's not going to be any "untrained" cops sticking people with needles. Police Chiefs hate liability and the public wouldn't stand for it. There are a couple of states that have Officers that are "designated" to draw the blood. They are assigned to the shifts and pull regular duties. The ARE TRAINED at the same schools as most lab technicians or practical nurses to draw blood. In almost all cases the blood is drawn at the station. Some Departments call a Paramedic.

The department I worked for, would transport the drunk to a hospital, or we had our stations next to the fire / EMS stations. We would call them next door to walk over and do it. No Police were allowed to do it, no matter what training we had. Our department had 3 former Paramedics and 2 registered nurses that were Police Officers on the street. The city wouldn't let them do it. You had to have a non-partial party do the blood draw.

As far as the "dusty roads", I did it everynight when I was a Paramedic. You don't think car accidents and shootings take place in sterile environments do you? The area to be punctured with a needle is always prepped and cleaned, and a sterile needle is used. We don't kick up the dust then shove the needle in the dirt before we stick you with'em.