MADD Reports DUI Deaths Up
MADD Reports US Drunk Driving Rates Rising Again.
According to MADD, Mothers Against Drunk Driving, almost 18,000 people died in alcohol-related accidents in the United States in 2003, up from 2002. The issue of drunk-driving dangers was highlighted in the '80s and '90s. MADD began in 1979 after a teenage girl was killed by the car of a drunk driver and her mother decided to take action. In the past two decades of MADD's heyday, drunk-driving deaths plummeted from 30,000 a year to 15,000.
“Get MADD all over again”
MADD blames success as its downfall. Now that it has brought to fruition 2,300 alcohol-related accident laws across the country, it seems that perhaps their advocacy is being treated as mundane news. MADD's new slogan, "Get MADD all over again," (2002 MADD Impaired Driving Summitt (pdf download)) seeks to revitalize interest in their organization.
Those who suffer the loss of their loved ones from drunk driving accidents find drunk driving laws around the country-as well as how they are administered-to be much too flexible, especially on repeat drunk drivers.
Naturally, citizens view the issue from different perspectives. Howard Neumann, a prosecutor from Greensboro, North Carolina, believes that a drunk driver is not unlike a man randomly firing a loaded gun from the side of the road. Either way he is dangerous and irresponsible, and should be punished accordingly. Debbie Smith would agree: she lost her young daughter after an intoxicated truck-driver ran a red light and hit her car. His sentence amounted to 18 days, the same number of years that Smith's daughter was alive.
Joel Oakley, a criminal defense attorney from Greensboro, takes a much more lenient position on the subject. Oakley says that people who are good can sometimes do bad. He also argues that despite that a person may completely have their faculties to drive, their breathalyzer measurement may be just barely under the legal level. He believes that MADD has played a significant role in harshly condemning defendants.
“okay to drive”
The ultimate enemy of police, MADD, and other anti-drunk driving groups lies in the mentality of people who think they are "okay to drive" after a few drinks. Highly noticeable checkpoints to monitor driver sobriety can help in deterring drivers from operating a vehicle under the influence. Word of mouth spreads the message that the police force is serious, and ultimately members of the community support each other in avoiding drunk driving.
July 1, 2004
Filed in Fatalities & Accidents | Statistics | Permalink | Comments (51)
BS Laws
Get caught the first time drinking and driving.... license gone for life... Or maybe in prison for life since you acutally murdered someone.
You may think it is a BS Law..... Let me tell you something
My brother was KILLED by one of you idoits in 1996...
Physically destoryed his wife....
Mentally destoryed his son
And created mental and physical problems wiht hiis daughter.
Destoryed his parents.... EVER LOST A CHILD YET
I HOPE YOU NEVER GO THROUGH this... so let's toughen up the laws more
I agree
Just 10 years????
Now tell me 10 years is too long
10 yrs,and the past 7 yrs law!
with ya
What
How are you convicted wrongly of a DUI? Breath test???
Your best bet, leave the beer etc alone and follow Gods plan
dwi sorry about your bro
gods plan has nothing to do with driving a car sober or otherwise
i have a b card and cant take communion at church or i loose my license for 6 years ? gods plan?
DUI/DWI
DUI/DWI
DUI/DWI
dui
BS
Jonathan
Wished more people would see the same.
I go to High Schools, organization and give my presentation what can and does happen.
You can not believe the positive response I see and hear about after I leave.
Hey Nimrod
Some simple math. If the number of deaths DECREASED (even a little) while at the same time the population INCREASED (meaning more drivers on the roads) that means THE SYSTEM IS WORKING. Hell, if the number of deaths stay the same while the population increases, that means the system is working.
DUH!
There has to be a line
THERE HAS TO BE A LINE
I agree with both of you
It is terrible that you made a mistake and lost all that you worked for. You are probably in your early twenties if you are in law school. Well that is 20 years of education and hard work lost due to a 15 minute poor judgement call. And that is not fair punishment. Yes, you could have hit someone before you reached home, and that is when you deserve a harsher punishment. But just the risk does not call for that hard of a sentence.
The both of you represent the Black and the White in this situation. You need to remember the Grey areas where they meet. Look at each others perspective before you make a final decision.
You never know the full story- the driver could have been driving to a hospital because he's a hemophiliac and got cut somehow while drinking at a party. It's a stretch, but you never know. Just open your minds to the possibilities, and such an open mind will help you find peace in yourself. You say God is forgiving am I right? Well we are His children, are we not? So follow in His footsteps- forgiveness is not just a holy action, its is for all of us.
Who has the anger problem?
Sad to Say
reply
Madd is Madd
dear a@#hole
Comment to "Sad to Say"
drunk driving deaths
"HIGHWAY TERRORISTS" shedding tears
DEAR LAWRENCE
I rest my case.
response
There has to be a line.
What if?
My argument:
1. There has to be a line where the punishment for non-accident DUI stops getting worse.
2. On an individual case basis, where there was no accident, the DUI case IS a victimless crime that did not cause property damage and where no malice was intended.
3. Destroying lives through the use of probation, criminal records, and excessive jailtime is more vengeful than it is just. This is not to say there shouldn't be a punishment. Remember, the legal limit has steadily gone down and punishments gotten worse due to MADD lobbying and my point is it has to stop somewhere. I am not saying drunk drivers should go free, I am saying that people are supporting this lobby out of strong emotion and the fact that the lobby uses appeal to emotion as their logic. It should be noted, "appeal to emotion" is a logical fallacy.
4. MADD has grown to be a monster. Where they have succeeded in accomplishing their goal they now have become a tyrannical force that is simply trying to carry out the revenge of the wronged to a point that the punishment is not befitting of the crime (a non-accident DUI).
There has to be a line (response)
get a grip
trying to get a grip
dui deaths
Dis Ease
dui deaths
who will they listen to?
After reading
None of you has a clue
prevent drunk driving without destroying lives
prevent durunk driving without destroying lives
_____________________________________
anrik
<a href="http://www.addictionrecovery.net/hawaii">Addiction Recovery Hawaii</a>
get over it
its a scam and peoples lives are greatly afected by it. it is a risk to drive no matter what, if i drive i could be killed by an old bastard or poor visioned driver or what ever its a risk we tend to over look
make booze illegal and exicute the fuckers that drink






BS Laws