for all the money we as americans spend on ONDCP ad campaigns against cannabis, the emphasis on this over alcohol is absurd. their slogan should really be:
"1930's-style propaganda - the anti-drug"
the prevalent attitude of expecting the alcohol industry to police itself is working out great. at least there is an industry, not a black market forced by irrational policy. drunk driving is hardly a social problem. there are absolutely no significant losses from it. MADD and the federal government must be lying. or are they?
source of information below
Impaired Driving by Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC)
In 2000, United States drivers with:
· BACs of .10 and above were involved in an estimated 2,058,400 crashes that killed 12,892 and injured 448,630
· BACs between .08-.09 were involved in an estimated 35,410 crashes that killed 1,097 and injured 20,150
· Positive BACs below .08 were involved in an estimated 69,400 crashes that killed 2,664 and injured 43,730
16653 people died in year 2000 from alcohol related crashes.
512510 were injured in alcohol related crashes
Costs
Alcohol is a factor in 26% of the United States’ crash costs. Alcohol-related crashes in the United States cost the public an estimated $114.3 billion in 2000, including $51.1 billion in monetary costs and an estimated $63.2 billion in quality of life losses. (For definitions of the cost categories, see the definitions fact sheet.) Alcohol-related crashes are deadlier and more serious than other crashes. People other than the drinking driver paid $71.6 billion of the alcohol-related crash bill.
Costs per Alcohol-Related Injury
The average alcohol-related fatality in the United States costs $3.5 million:
· $1.1 million in monetary costs
· $2.4 million in quality of life losses
The estimated cost per injured survivor of an alcohol-related crash averaged $99,000:
· $49,000 in monetary costs
· $50,000 in quality of life losses
Impact on Auto Insurance Rates
Alcohol-related crashes accounted for an estimated 18% of the $103 billion in U.S. auto insurance payments. Reducing alcohol-related crashes by 10% would save $1.8 billion in claims payments and loss adjustment expenses.
so maybe there are some costs involved with all this drunk driving. now how many people die in car crashes total?
source of information below
Total Traffic Fatality vs. Alcohol Related Traffic Fatality
Calendar Year | Total Killed in
Alcohol Related Crashes | Total Killed in
All Traffic Crashes |
Number | Percent | Number | Percent |
1982 | 26,173 | 60% | 43,945 | 100.0% |
1983 | 24,635 | 58% | 42,589 | 100.0% |
1984 | 24,762 | 56% | 44,257 | 100.0% |
1985 | 23,167 | 53% | 43,825 | 100.0% |
1986 | 25,017 | 54% | 46,087 | 100.0% |
1987 | 24,094 | 52% | 46,390 | 100.0% |
1988 | 23,833 | 51% | 47,087 | 100.0% |
1989 | 22,424 | 49% | 45,582 | 100.0% |
1990 | 22,587 | 51% | 44,599 | 100.0% |
1991 | 20,159 | 49% | 41,508 | 100.0% |
1992 | 18,290 | 47% | 39,250 | 100.0% |
1993 | 17,908 | 45% | 40,150 | 100.0% |
1994 | 17,308 | 43% | 40,716 | 100.0% |
1995 | 17,732 | 42% | 41,817 | 100.0% |
1996 | 17,749 | 42% | 42,065 | 100.0% |
1997 | 16,711 | 40% | 42,013 | 100.0% |
1998 | 16,673 | 40% | 41,501 | 100.0% |
1999 | 16,572 | 40% | 41,717 | 100.0% |
2000 | 17,380 | 41% | 41,945 | 100.0% |
2001 | 17,400 | 41% | 42,196 | 100.0% |
2002 | 17,524 | 41% | 43,005 | 100.0% |
2003** | 17,013 | 40% | 42,643 | 100.0% |
*Source - National Highway Traffic Safety Administration FARS data
** as of August 10, 2004
compare this information to the industry sponsored information site alcoholstats.com.
The Department of Transportation reports that drunk-driving fatalities have fallen by more than a third. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 82 percent of adolescents ages 12-17 do not drink. A national collegiate survey shows that nearly three-quarters of college students drink moderately, infrequently, or not at all.
notice the failure to disclose years, rather vaguely note a trend. 18% percent of 12-17 year olds use alcohol? that's almost one in five, how terrible. and are they using it 'responsibly'? in europe, the youth are brought up with an understanding of the effects of alcohol and it is an accepted part of the dining experience. it is not uncommon to see a 12-17 year old with a small glass of wine with their meal. in america, this is child endangerment/abuse, and the authorities will come and break up your family and put you in jail. that i disagree with. if education is the key to prevention, is not shared experimentation and parental reinforcement education? that would actually take proactive parents to turn off the glowing box and talk to their children. all the 'drink responsibly' reinforcement on the tv and on billboards is nice, but obviously ineffective. possibly due to the heavy marketing of so-called beautiful active people shown in appealing life scenarios, all including alcohol on the same glowing box. it doesn't matter how far from schools you put the billboards, when they are plastered all around the sports arenas and shown in ads during these events on television. surely children watch sporting events, right? and then finish it off with the statement that only one in four college students have a problem with alcohol. yet do so in such a way to 'spin' it that three in four college students do not have a problem. genius. i bow down to your social engineering skills.
These signs of progress are the result of the work of many Americans, from parents and teachers to law enforcement, from health-care workers to community leaders, from brewers to wholesalers and retailers. Responsibility Matters.
is that so? i see the progress that your products are killing less people, but i am not impressed. teachers are doing what? telling kids 'drugs are bad, m'kay, and alcohol too'. law enforcement? oh right, the ones that have to clean up the bloody stains from yet another drunk driver fatality. health-care workers? for admitting and treating the living from the drunkard caused carnage. community leaders? for making tougher laws and passing out marketing swag that do not make a real impact. brewers? now that's a real stretch. sellers? they do plenty... of selling alcohol to the drunk drivers! marketing slogans matter.
This website was created to highlight research and statistics regarding alcohol abuse and responsible consumption, and much of the information provided comes from independent government and university research. Just click on one of the channels at left to review information.
channel listing below.
underage drinking
drunk driving
college issues
responsible drinking
alcohol advertising
state information
click on them on your own. is it possible that these will only show declines in usage? methinks so.
now, why is it then that MADD is reporting something else?
MADD Responds to Release of Updated NHTSA Traffic Death Statistics With Specific Call to Action
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
July 17, 2003
CONTACT:
Misty Moyse, 469-420-4558
or
Tresa Coe Hardt, 469-420-4545
Statement For Attribution to Wendy J. Hamilton, National President, Mothers Against Drunk Driving
The final traffic fatality research released today by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration brings good and bad news. The good news is that last year alcohol-related traffic deaths were lower than previously estimated. The bad news, however, is that 17,419 people died in preventable tragedies accounting for 41 percent of total traffic fatalities. This makes three years in a row that alcohol-related traffic fatalities have increased - a sad chapter in U.S. history.
three years in a row of increases. is this a trend as well?
We cannot overlook an epidemic of alcohol-related deaths, equivalent to two 757 passenger jets crashing each week for an entire year. Today alone, an estimated 48 people in the U.S. will senselessly die - and not because of terrorists attacks or terminal illness; the culprit is alcohol-impaired driving. Each year half a million other people are injured in alcohol-related crashes.
at least they call it an epidemic, not a problem. using the airplane equivalent is nice too. ~48 people per day killed by the alcohol industry in automobiles. some problem.
While personal responsibility is an important factor, research shows that the most effective deterrents to drunk driving are implemented by legislators and carried out through law enforcement and our judicial system. The passage and enforcement of lower illegal drunk driving limits to .08 percent blood alcohol concentration and other important laws no doubt contributed to the recent progress but there is still much work to be done to rid our roadways of drunk drivers.
this is where the whole motherly nanny state part of this is brought into play. fact - it is absolutely impossible to legislate the bad out of people. why is it that Prohibition [1919-1933] is continually forgotten? the judicial system? to what, allow lawyers to profit off the fallout of alcohol-induced carnage? personal responsibility is the only factor. i will not accept this default brush-off to the courts to solve problems, as they do not cause the problem. the companies that make the alcohol that the stores sell to the person who drinks and drives do.
Congress now has a historic opportunity to draft a lifesaving roadmap for the nation with the reauthorization of the Transportation Equity Act of the 21st Century (TEA-21), a multi-year, multi-billion dollar highway funding bill. Related newly-introduced legislation backed by MADD would create stricter penalties for repeat offenders and other higher-risk drunk drivers (SB 1141 and HB 2681) and establish more funds for much-needed sobriety checkpoints and other DUI crackdowns (Senate Bill 1139). Now is the time for action and MADD will be working to ensure that drunk driving victims and survivors’ voices are heard.
here we go once again with the legislation. just lock em' all up, that will make the problem go away. nice try. stricter penalties? how about death. or a good beating. adding checkpoints, not a bad idea to increase the number of arrests. it just furthers the need to house people in the disorganized bureaucratic corrupt prison and county jail systems. and if more people are added to the growing number already, that means more facilities will have to be built. and that costs money. next local and state governments will need money to build these structures, so measures to float bonds will be proposed and passed. then federal matching funds will be requested, which once again, is money that isn't there, thus increasing the growing national debt. so now there are more jails and prisons, more inmates, more strongarm tactic unionized guards, and less money for healthcare and subsidizing petroleum prices. did i forget education? no more money for that either.
so, in this one person's opinion, the simple answer is to stop the system. the more legislation there is, the more the system gets fed. the time is now for less legislation and more personal responsibility. this is way off the topic of alcohol, but as i believe i have illustrated, alcohol is quite a contributor to the system causing the slow and eventual collapse of this nations financial viability.
the ACLU is another contributor to the system, though i find some of their actions are reasonable and rational. suing over crosses on city insignia? frivolous. where is the case against st. augustine, florida, the oldest european settlement in the united states? it's the one with the big cross in the middle. and it's named after a catholic saint guy. go ahead. clog the courts with more suits of this caliber of lunacy. feed the system.
to the alcohol industry and their proponents of death, i question your proactiveness in taking responsibility for a problem caused by your customers on the human race. if tobacco companies and asbestos manufacturers can be taken to task and sued for the effects of their products, why is it then that no senate subcommittee hearings are held to question the CEO's of major alcohol entities? what's up with that?