The Silent Epidemic

This is a subject that is very important to me personally.  

The number of deaths caused by drunk drivers each year.

2006-15,829

2005-16,885 (about 39% of all traffic deaths)

2004-16,694 (about 39%)

2003-17,013 (about 40%)

2002-17,524 (about 41%)

In 2006, 45 children (age 14 or younger) who were walking or riding a bicycle were killed by alcohol-impaired drivers.

In 2005, 856, celebrating the holidays, were killed on Christmas or New Year's Eve.

Every half an hour someone is killed by a drunk driver.

Over half of those convicted of drunk-driving are repeat offenders. 

September 11,2001: 2,974 total deaths

Since September 11, not even including the last two years, there have been 83,945 deaths caused by drunk-driving.  Which means that more than TWENTY-EIGHT times the people killed by drunk drivers than killed by terrorists that day.  Likewise, drunk driving has taken more American  lives than the War on Terror has taken.  (in terms of soldiers.)  More than twenty times more.  Yet how often do you hear about drunk-driving deaths in comparison to war deaths or terrorism-related deaths?  Perhaps they are not news because they happen so often.

The cost of the "War on Terror" to the U.S. government (and taxpayers): over $700 billion. Estimates say this number will likely grow to over $4 million.

 The U.S. government spent over $26 million on foreign aid last year (this number has grown greatly since George W. Bush took office because he has increased funding for anti-poverty and AIDS programs in Africa substantially), including about $3 billion to Israel.

Last year, the U.S.  Department of Transportation launched a "massive" new anti-drunk driving campaign.  The cost?  Seven million dollars.  How much has been spent on the "War on  Terror" so far?  Seven-hundred million dollars.  Something is backward here.  What is even more amazing, however, is that most drunk-driving advertising is done by private groups, most notably MADD, every37.com, and the American Beverage Institute.    

Drunk-driving accidents cause about $276 billion in the United States annually.

There were over 1.4 million people arrested for drunk driving last year.  However, there are an estimated 159 million episodes of drunk driving not reported each year.  Only about .05% of episodes are acted on by police.

The sad part of the equation is that this problem is totally avoidable.  If the government decided to be serious about drunk driving and crack down, the problem could be nearly eliminated within a decade.

There are several ways the government could get the situation under control.  

1.) Enact Tougher Laws.  In most states, it is a misdemeanor to drive drunk, meaning you likely won't get any jail time or suspension of license.  Drunk driving should be an automatic felony with mandatory license suspension and/or jail time.  This is one reason people drink and drive repeatedly, some over a dozen times, until they hurt someone.  They aren't scared of the consequences.  This may seem a little extreme, but this is life and death.  you are willingly putting others in grave danger.  These drivers are unfit and cannot make wise choices are be responsible. It doesn't make any sense that if you drive drunk and don't happen to hurt anybody it is a misdemeanor, but if by chance you hurt or kill someone it is a felony.  There is no difference in intent.  It is pure luck.  There is, however, a a difference in deterrence when drivers consider consequences.

2.) Don't Publicize Checkpoints.  Twenty-three major studies have that, when executed properly sobriety checkpoints are an effective means of slowing down drunk-driving.  However, that caveat "when executed properly", is a big if.  Police totally ruin the idea by releasing where they are going to be.  They broadcast it on the news before it is happening and while it is happening.  How idiotic is that?  Basically you're telling people, shouting at them, "If you drink, we'll tell you exactly where we are so don't come here and you'll be fune".  Why on earth would you announce where checkpoints were going to occur?  it makes absolutely no sense and is totally absurd.

3.) Hold alcohol-serving eateries and bars reasonably accountable.  All establishments with alcohol licenses should have a protocol for dealing with intoxicated customers who are attempting to drive.  They should also be required to notify law enforcement in such situations. Research has show that server intervention programs are effective.

4.) Require all new cars to have alcohol-resistant technology.  There are many variants of technology that easily test the blood-alcohol limit of the driver and can prevent someone intoxicated from driving.  The two most popular are a guage which requires the driver to blow into it before they are allowed to drive and a more simple device in the steering wheel that tests the perspiration on the driver's hand, as well as odor.  It may seem extreme but most states require drivers and passengers to wear seatbelts to protect themselves.  This requirement would be for the protection of others.  Moreover, why does a person have a right to drive a car if they are drunk?  Legally and morally, they don't.

5.) Lower the BAC from .08 to .05 nationwide.  Legally, drivers must blow a .08 to be arrested for driving under the influence.  However, many drivers with lower BACs cause accidents that result in deaths or injuries.  When the national BAC limit for DUIs was lowered from .10 to .08 fatalities were reduced by 7%.  .08, I believe, is still too high and unreasonable.  Four-six beers in a night will make you blow a .08 (depending on body weight on other variables).  Nobody should be driving after drinking that much.  A significant   

6.) More Consistency Nationally.  It is not a good thing that state by state it varies how likely you are to get hurt or killed by a drunk driver.  There really should be no likelihood.  Some states, however, have a 60% greater rate of alcohol-related accidents than others.  States are now graded on an A-F scale.  There needs to be more work done at the national level to organize laws from state to state.