Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathji
You quoted an American insurance company's website for your 'statistics' relating to a problem you have with stats given in a report for Canadian alcohol related accidents, and you are concerned about fudging numbers?
If that's your concern, lets set the record straight:
From A Quick Look at Alcohol-related Crashes in Canada (Emphasis in the original)
From the summary on that page:
from the rest of the report:
So that means, the 'exaggeration' that you are up in arms about, even assuming everyone who was .07 or lower was not impacted by alcohol at all, is 5%.
That 5% extra doesn't scare anyone. The reality is you are chasing a boogeyman because of some hard on you have for MADD and your concern that their prohibitionist agenda will somehow hurt your life. |
The "one driver" and the "have been drinking" part leads me to believe that it still refers to anything above .00 BAC and doesn't take fault into consideration so the basic logic still applies. If I'm either slammed out of my tree or I just had a single beer and Im sitting at a red light and someone who is completely sober rear ends me going 80 and dies, alcohol is still a "factor".
Those other precentages (17% under the limit, not 5% btw) only refer to accidents where the drinking driver died. You don't know how of these drinking drivers were completely fine (lets say between .01 and .04) and not at fault when they were involved in an accident where others died.
Quote:
|
This thread is about why people shouldn't drink and drive, not some ramblings of someone who is scared his booze might be harder to get or his taxes might go up.
|
Yeah, lets all repost the OP. What a thrilling thread that would be. If you want to do that no one is stopping you.
BTW, If someone doesn't know they shouldn't drink and drive, a thread on an internet forum isn't likely to change there mind.