Watchman

Gaelic

TRAITORS

Medicine?

Fatal Accident Reporting System

Proof That You Are 20 TIMES More Likely to be Killed by a Sober Driver than a Drinking Driver!

Where's the Pony in all this BS?

Two Million DUI Arrests Each Year x $10,000 per Arrest is $200 BILLION per Year

• Drivers in England With NO Roadblocks Are THREE TIMES Safer Than Ours.
• Each One Point Increase in IQ Saves 9 Lives per 100,000 Vehicles.
• Why the Highly Publicized Ancient Roadside Study is Wrong: 24%, not 4%, drink and drive.
• Police Reported Alcohol Involvement LESS THAN FOUR PERCENT!
• Why We MUST Crack Down on Teetotalers.
• FARS 1998 Database, Drunk Drivers are at MOST Seven Percent.
• FARS 1999 Database, Drunk Drivers Are 6.8 Percent to at most 7 Percent.
• FARS 2001 Database, Drunk Drivers are at MOST Three Percent.
• FARS 2008 Database, Drunk Drivers "Cause" 2% of Fatal Crashes.
• Study of Thousands of College Students: 49-59% Drink & Drive.
• Age Versus Time of Day of Accident Proves Young Drivers More Dangerous than Drunk Drivers.
• Excellent Critique of MADD's DUI Campaign.
• Why Do We Still Have a Motor Vehicle Fatality Rate 3 Times Higher Than Countries Who Never Benefitted from MADD's Wisdom?

"The analysis by Connolly, Kimball, and Moulton (1989) mentioned above suggests that female drivers have both a higher overall crash risk and a higher alcohol-related fatal-crash risk. Combined data from FARS and the 1986 National Roadside Breathtesting Survey suggest that the relative fatal-crash risk of a female driver with a BAC of 0.10% or more could be of the order of 50% higher than it is for a male driver at the same BAC. Of course, estimates based on these two unmatched data sets are, as indicated above, are only very rough, but they are consistent with prior case-control studies (see Jones and Joscelyn 1978)."

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/ncsa/pdf/Alcohol99.pdf
  "Traffic fatalities in alcohol-related crashes fell by 1 percent from 1998 to
  1999. The 15,786 alcohol-related fatalities in 1999 (38 percent of total
  traffic fatalities for the year) represent a 30 percent reduction from the
  22,404 alcohol-related fatalities reported in 1989 (49 percent of the total)."

The second statement above is a complete and total misrepresentation of the data, and it's their own FARS database which proves it.  Researching a number of different years in this database indicates that the general trend of drinking and driving is that about ten percent of the more than 100,000 people involved in fatal accidents each year are reported by the police as alcohol involved:

• 37% are determined by blood alcohol testing to not have had a bac > .10%, relegating ONE THIRD of these arrests to a witch hunt.
• 33% are "Not a Fatality".
• 32% are not drivers of motor vehicles: they are passengers, pedestrians, bicyclists, motorcyclists, etc.
• 27% are young drivers who NHTSA reports have such a high fatality rate that drinking and driving has negligible [read: zero] impact on their already high accident rate.
• 17% SHOULD be attributed to drowsy driving even though NHTSA estimates only 4% are.
• 1% are attributed to drug involvement.

This is 147% of all the people involved in fatal accidents who police report each year are alcohol involved.  Where is the DRUNK driver who the above statement implies is the one who allegedly causes 38-49% of all fatal accidents each year, or as Justice Roberts puts it, 14,000 accidents annually?  And what about the role of women drivers who NHTSA claims are 50% more likely to have a fatal accident than men drivers, versus drinking men drivers with a BAC of 0.12 who are only 30% more?  Or Hispanic drivers whose brethren in Mexico are, according to the World Health Organization, 5 TIMES more likely per car than the average American driver to have a fatal accident, or Blacks whose brethren in the Central African Republic who are 590 TIMES as likely?

Now of course there is some overlap between these various factors which would explain why they add up to 147% of the Police Reported Alcohol Involvement.  For example, if 2% of the drowsy drivers were also young drivers, then the total would be only 145%.  And if half of those who were not a fatality were also passengers or pedestrians, then the total would be only 127.5%.  And if the 1% who are drug involved were also young drivers, then the total would be only 126.5%. 

So now how many fatal accidents are left over to be BLAMED on drunk drivers being the CAUSE of (not just involved in) these accidents?  None? Doesn't this suggest that drunk drivers are the SAFEST drivers?

Research it yourself.  There are many different ways to view this, and you might get a more accurate reading.  If you do, please let us know so it can be included on the above list.

Of Ten Thousand Police Reported Alcohol Involvement Cases Annually

• 33% Are "Not A Fatality"
• 43% are Non-Hispanic
• 42.5% are White
• 5.2% are Hispanic
• 5.2% are Black

Drowsy Driving

In 2008, there were 1,799 drivers whose accidents were attributed to drowsy driving, which is 2.7% of the 66,244 drivers who were involved in fatal accidents. 87 of the accidents involving the 2,247 drivers with a BAC > .10 or 4% of them were attributed to drowsy driving.

Women and Black Drivers

Because women are 50% to four times more likely per mile driven to have fatal accidents than men, and because the United Nations reports that Black drivers are 100 to one THOUSAND more time per car to have a fatal accident than White drivers, failing to take these vast differences in driving ability into account greatly skews the data.

HBD

This author was involved in a minor accident in the middle of nowhere, in the middle of the night, with only one witness--a police officer who clearly saw that the reason for the accident was the other driver failing to stop for a stop sign until he was in the middle of the road and slammed on his brakes way too late.  The officer asked "have you been drinking", and being young and naive I acknowledged that I had had a glass of wine with lunch, 11 hours earlier.  He wrote "HBD" on the ticket, which is the only comment he wrote about this accident.  When my insurance company heard this, no explanation was needed--they were going to pay for the accident no matter who was at fault because it was ME who "had been drinking".

This accident became one of the 4% which was counted as "police reported alcohol involvement" even though alcohol clearly had nothing to do with it.  But in searching the FARS database, there's no way to establish how many accidents are mis-reported like this because there is no option for the police to report the TRUTH about what they actually witnessed. This is a KEY factor which could be as much if not more than fifty percent of all of these types of reports.

ARREST, TRY, CONVICT, IMPRISON THE MADD

JUSTICE DEMANDS THAT THEY BE PUNISHED ONE BILLION TIMES MORE SEVERLY THAN THEIR 59,892,000 VICTIMS

Bottom Line

Quiz

Ignoring the above facts, and ASSUMING that 10% of all fatal accidents involve a driver with a BAC greater than 0.10 (drunk drivers), that 90% involve only drivers with a BAC < 0.10 (sober drivers), and that only 30% of all drivers IN GENERAL have a BAC greater than 0.10:

1. Which driver are you most likely to be killed by?  A drunk driver or a sober driver?
2. By how much?
3. Per mile, which is the most dangerous driver?
4. By how much?

Copyright @ 2007 by Fathers' Manifesto & Christian Party