|
| |
The NHTSA and Government Fraud
Women drive only 30% of miles driven but are in 37% of the fatal
accidents
Even though police reports filed by thousands of
police departments across the country show that only 4% of all accidents are "alcohol
involved", the NHTSA uses a "statistical
model" which embellishes this data to enable them to report that 10% of all
accidents are "alcohol involved". When pedestrians, passengers,
bicyclists, other non-drivers; and drivers who were listed as "alcohol involved"
but who had a bac = 0, who weren't administered the test, who were administered the test
but the results were nonconclusive, and who had a bac < .10, are removed,
drivers with a bac > .10 are only 3% of those involved in fatal accidents according to
the NHTSA, and only 1.25% according to the police reports. It is this fatal
discrepancy between valid police
reports and data manipulation by a known advocacy group like the NHTSA which is
responsible for the mass hysteria surrounding drinking and driving, which ultimately leads
errant writers, reporters, editors, and headline writers to proclaim from the rooftops
that:
"HALF OF ALL TRAFFIC DEATHS ARE CAUSED BY
DRINKING ALCOHOL".
The reality is that women
drivers are 70% more likely per mile to have an accident than men drivers, which makes
them far more dangerous than men who drink and drive.
A German study used the
most conservative approach possible to analyzing the real effects of drinking and driving
and showed that, overall, drinking and driving increased the likelihood of an accident by
at most 32%. Even using its liberal assumptions, it pointed out that drivers with a
bac = .04 were 30% less likely than drivers with a bac = 0 [read: nondrinking drivers] to
have an accident. But where this study reported that 5.5% of all German drivers have a bac > 0 [read:
drinking drivers] at any one time, it omitted another 5.2% of the drivers who
refused to take the test who may have and most likely had been drinking. If only 5.2% of
German drivers drink and drive, but 7.2% of the drivers in accidents were those drivers
who drink and drive, then drinking drivers are 32.3% more likely than nondrinking drivers
to have an accident. If drinking drivers constitute 10.7% of all drivers, then they
are 35.7% less likely than nondrinking drivers to have an accident.
Needless to say, getting an accurate figure regarding the percentage of drivers who drink
and drive in the first place is fundamental to understanding where the problem
lays: a drinking driver, or a woman driver. Without even considering the
possibility that drinking drivers are safer drivers per mile than nondrinking drivers, the
NHTSA data as it stands shows that women drivers who don't drink
and drive are fourteen times (14X) more likely to have a fatal accident than men who
do drink and drive. Once the actual alcohol consumption
in the US is taken into account, it's inevitible.
|
Drinking
Driver |
Nondrinking
Driver |
Percent |
Relative
odds if 5.5% of drivers drink |
0.98 |
1.30 |
132.31% |
Relative
odds if 10.7% drink |
1.04 |
0.67 |
64.27% |
There are many ill effects of this campaign by MADD:
 | We have more Americans in prisons and jails *just*
for drinking and driving than Japan has for all crimes combined. |
 | It costs a minimum of $20 billion per year to
operate. |
 | It undermined the basic freedom of many Americans to
simply travel, a violation of the US
Constitution. |
 | The reduction in alcohol
consumption already caused by these DUI laws is directly responsible for an additional
35,000 heart disease deaths/year. |
 | Advocacy groups like this claim to have saved 11,614 more lives than the number of lives saved by the actual
reduction in the motor vehicle fatality rate. |
 | We know that outlawing women drivers would save more
than 9,000 lives per year, which is 11 times more than the absolute maximum of 820 lives
which would be saved if this program were a 100% success and drinking and driving were
completely eliminated. |
Outlawing women drivers would cost one fiftieth a s much per life saved than it would cost to continue this
failed DUI campaign, and it would save 43,430 more lives per year. There would be
9,250 fewer traffic fatalities and 35,000 fewer heart disease fatalities. Where the
most optimistic assessment of the cost per life saved of the DUI campaign is $24 million,
the maximum cost per life saved by outlawing women drivers is $.45 million, including a
possible reduction in their labor force participation rate.

| |
|