Posted on 12/22/2005 11:16:52 AM PST by EveningStar
The three-fold mission of DAMM of PA is to get mad mothers to stay at home and cook and clean where they belong, to stop drinking and driving because you might spill some, and to prevent other alcohol abuse like returning the keg before it's been emptied.
(Excerpt) Read more at user.pa.net ...
F*ck YEAH!
"Point taken. But, for the sake of this discussion, how many lives does one get to put at risk because one decides he or she must drink & drive? "
FAR more lives have been snuffed out by drunk driving than have by terrorism in America, yet there's no outrage here about the Patriot Act.
So why the outrage at traffic stops, which are doing the same thing (stopping drunks / stopping terrorists)?
I abhor drunk drivers, terrorists, illegal traffic stops, AND the Patriot Act, for the record.
You didn't have to. Look at the top of the thread. What do you think the "DD" in MADD and DDAM stands for?
I guess I wasn't very clear in my post. I realize that. I've spent a lot of time since then thinking about what could have happened.
Please see my post 26.
Well, God Bless you. I hope your wife has forgiven you and that you forgive yourself.
DAMM that makes me MADD!
Then I bet only the criminals would do it. /sarc
What's DDAM? Do you mean "DAMM" (which does not have a "DD" in it?)
The objection to MADD is not that drunk driving is bad, but rather because MADD wants to demonize anyone who drinks any amount of alcohol and later drives, and classify any accident in which any participant (even a passenger) had any amount of alcohol as an "alcohol-related crash".
Once again a sterling display by yours truly of the dangers of Freeping during a busy day at work.
That's it. Hand over your car keys. You've had too much.
I do think that MADD, the target of the spoof, has gone overboard.Even Candy Lightner thinks that MADD has been taken over by neo-Prohibitionists, so the spoof is spot on.
-Eric
Their ultimate goal is to ban alcohol.Edited for accuracy.sales at all public places
-Eric
One of the original founders of MADD left in disgust over the directions it was taking and went to work for the Distilled Spirits Council, the trade association of the industry, operating their ressponsibile drinking campaigns.More like the founder. See post 52.
-Eric
Too much work. It's been a dreadful week.
They've gone way beyond just trying to curb DWIs and are on to full blown abstinence. Several years ago here in Raleigh, NC, a nightclub established a bus service to pickup up and drop off NC State University students. Sounded like a good idea to me because it would keep people from driving, but MADD would have none of it. They pitched a fit saying it would encourage drinking. Besides, BAC is arbitrary BS. BAC effects different people in different ways. Some pass out at .08 while others show little signs of impairment.
I did a research report as a senior in high school (1982) about BAC levels. The ABC (Alcohol Beverage Control board) sponsored the contest and I placed high enough to win $300 in scholarship money for college. Anyway, all my research was done by interviewing people. One of those was Dr. Patricia Waller who was head of the Highway Safety Research Center at UNC. They did a BAC test using med school students who, as it turned out, rarely drank. She said virtually all passed out by .10. Dr. Waller then had an idea. The building was being renovated so she asked some of the construction workers to volunteer. She chose those who drank regularly. At .10, she said these people barely showed any impairment. I also spoke with the head of the NC Highway Patrol and even he conceded that BAC levels were not a good measurement of impairment and added that it was easier to convict with a quantitave benchmark.
did you see two d's at the top of this thread?
are you drunk?
I agree with you.
I have a friend whose only child was killed by a drunk driver. I definitely want all drunks off the road.
I also have a friend who belongs to MADD, but he has told me about how they overstep. For example, if you take Nyquil (which contains alcohol) and then walk to work and get hit by a car, it is considered an "alcohol-related accident" even though the driver had nothing to drink and even if there was no fault by either party. Sometimes an accident is just that - an accident. But MADD wants to be able to point to dramatic statistics and tries to make it look like every third driver is drunk.
It seems to me that just one drunk driver is one too many. You shouldn't have to be a pack of drama queens who exaggerate and twist the facts to make your point.
I also suspect that like every organization that started out with a good and noble purpose (NAACP, NOW, unions,...), they may have morphed into an organization that is more interested in perpetuating the jobs of its hierarchy than in accomplishing anything worthwhile.
That's a good example of their overreaching. There are a lot of other examples I've seen in the past, I can't remember right off hand, but that's the kind of thing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.