I wasn't aware of MADD's decline into prohibition. MADD's greatest value was the attention it brought to the problem and not any advocacy for more stringent laws. Glad to have this brought to my attention.

The reality of this whole program is that it is an extreme moneymaker, disguised as some sort of socially appropriate endeavor. Its a little like the flood control departments. As they do flood control projects, the actual flood damages go down, and the agency needs to expand the definitiion of floods so as to keep itself in business. With MADD, as the number of fatalities goes down, they need to expand their definitions to keep in business. Temperance is a natural expansion direction. I have thought that they really wanted zero alcohol use, and wanted to use the power of government to enforce that.

And we all know the name of that dinosaur is rapturous fecalosopus. Very commonly found around the political arena.

I hadn't heard that before but it makes sense. My uncle was a cop years ago. He hated working speed trap duty. They would set up at the bottom of a hill and then turn the traffic light off at the top of the hill so cars would didn't have to stop. It was not for safety---it was just to raise money.

Neither scientist nor advocacy groups should do it, and yet they do.

Its why I cynically assume that a good chunk of the stats you see/read are "off" to a greater or lesser degree.

Example: In my town we had a big debate over opening a premium outlet mall. One of the property abutters pulled a number out of his nether regions of 15 Million cars a year would drive through the area for the mall.

Even assuming open 365 days a year, which would not be true, that would be 41,095 cars a day in a parking lot sized for about 500 cars, including employee parking. In other words pretty much an impossible arrangement. The true traffic isn't even close to that.

Didn't stop him or his agenda from making up a totally bogus stat.

The road to hell... It has now reached it's destination. It would also appear as if major car companies like GM are paying protection money to the racket.

That's definitely the case. For instance, studies have shown that a long yellow reduces accidents and reduces the number of tickets issued for running the light. Short yellows have the opposite effect ( more accidents, more tickets issued). Which do you think cities prefer?
http://www.alternet.org/story/145752/cit...

Whu-whu-whu-what? MADD needs to go the way of the dinosaur?
Oh, I get it. MADD needs to go the way to where I reside at my Jurassic Park paddock. I have a trick that employs my tail, a big rock and a big switch in the electronics section. My payoff? Yum! Yum!
Just have them stand by the sign that states, "For the love of God, do not pull this lever." Who knows? Maybe one of those know-it-alls will render my batting skills unnecessary.

Some other articles on point
http://getmadd.com/
http://getmadd.com/WHYgetMADD.htm
http://www.drunkard.com/issues/08_02/08_......
http://gatorpress.com/?p=280

If so-called scientists can do it, then why not advocacy groups?

I would enjoy seeing the stats as I have thought that was true for some time. Can you provide links? If not, can you scan/photo the source docs? No rush, just interested.

They all lie about stats, every one of them.

The actual stats don't impress so they start moving decimals around.

Just like any "activist".....personal culpability for long reaching affectives...are lost in the immediacy of a shallow objective.

hear hear

hear hear

I have often wondered if this was the case. Thanks for sharing your findings.

MADD plays right into the hands of law enforcement. They use emotion to push their agenda and law enforcement uses it to get money. I really think the money component is more important to all of them now.

Emotionally based justifications are always skewed.

If we were really against drunk driving we would get rid of the taxi monopolies, but we don't, which shows this is not about saving lives but collecting revenue and turning people into criminals.

Some other articles on point
http://getmadd.com/
http://getmadd.com/WHYgetMADD.htm
http://www.drunkard.com/issues/08_02/08_...
http://gatorpress.com/?p=280

I have looked into the studies of whether traffic tickets actually reduce the number of accidents, which is the only rational reason for traffic tickets. The results show that traffic tickets have almost no effect on the number of accidents.

They start with an answer and then look for facts to support that answer, the opposite of science.