Proponents of stronger DUI laws like to bandy about statistics to support their cause, such as "close to half of all motor-vehicle crash fatalities are alcohol-related", but I'm unimpressed by such a vague statistic.
What does this really mean? The reader is supposed to infer that the crash was caused by a driver who was at least over the legal BAC limit and at most a raving, slobbering drunken lunatic and a major threat to society. But what if a stone sober driver caused the crash by running into a drunk driver who was doing nothing wrong? What if a passenger was drunk? What if there was an open bottle in the car from which the driver hadn't even imbibed? Lots of possible scenarios. Are these all "alcohol-related"?
When they show me a statistic that proves how many drunk drivers actually caused these wrecks I'll pay more attention.
From observation I know that the biggest danger is from distracted drivers. They're reading, eating, slapping the kids, putting on make-up and - of course - talking on the cell phone. I dodge these people every day, and they don't appear to be drunk.
1 comment:
This is nice blog, I gather alot of information here. I need more information about this blog.
=================
james
Dui In California
Post a Comment