April 13, 2005
Never Satisfied
Last weekend saw one of those pointless, senseless tragedies that make you stop and ponder the seeming randomness of life.
Ann Ford Nelson swerved off River Road, above the Mississippi, on Sunday, and smashed into a tree, killing herself and a 13 year old family friend.
Of course, like many random tragedies, it wasn't all that random.
St. Paul banker and civic leader Anne Ford Nelson had about twice the legal level of alcohol in her system when she lost control of her car Sunday, killing herself and a 13-year-old family friend along Mississippi River Boulevard in St. Paul..187. Almost double the current limit, 2.25 times the new one.Nelson's blood-alcohol level was .187 percent, according to preliminary autopsy results released Tuesday by the Ramsey County Medical Examiner's office and the St. Paul police. Minnesota's legal limit is currently .10 percent, but will drop to .08 percent on Aug. 1.
I guess MADD was right. Right?
Not so fast.
Mothers Against Drunk Driving is, naturally, awash in sympathy:
That's a considerable amount of alcohol in her system," said Lynne Goughler, public policy liaison for the Minnesota chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving [...and third-degree black belt in understatement - Ed].Nothing wrong with that statement. Right?"People need to understand the consequences of drinking and driving and they just don't," she said. "The results can often be a very devastating car crash. I don't think people realize that alcohol is still a major factor in driving deaths in Minnesota. It's not getting better; it's getting worse."
Wrong.
For starters, two decades of constant awareness-raising and relentless - some would say "superheated" - law enforcement have lowered the death rate from drunk driving considerably.
Now, traffic deaths have risen overall:
But drunk driving deaths are not only down over the past two decades, they're down sharply. Two decades of guilt-until-proven innocent, of demi-constitutional highway checkpoints, of legalized graft through property forfeiture laws, have lowered the death toll to an extent undreamed of when the effort started.
So what would MADD suggest? What might have intervened with Ms. Nelson and her young victim?
Remember; she was at a .187; that's pretty bombed.
Good thing we lowered the BAC limit to .08, huh?
Of course not. The problem is that most accidents, certainly most lethal ones, are caused by people whose BAC is well above .1, to say nothing of .08.
No, MADD's efforts won't bring Ms. Nelson and her young victim back to life. They will do two things:
- Usher a whole new class of
revenue sourcesnew criminals into the justice/industrial complex - people arrested after three or four beers, whose odds of having an accident were lower than Britney Spears' shot at celebrating a silver anniversary with Kevin Federline. - Commensurately, the driving, social-drinking public will be in fear; fear of sudden, arbitrary criminalization over...what? Three beers rather than two?
- MADD's long term goal, a new prohibition on alcohol, will naturally be met.
Hey, we could propose a bill like the one currently being discussed in Sweden where you have a breathalizer in the car that you must blow into in order for the car to start. That'd be great fun!
Posted by: LB at April 13, 2005 03:18 PMLower the drinking age to 16. Raise the driving age to 18. Deregulate the cab industry. Allow jitney service. Pass a road geography test, an enhanced drving test, and a safe-vehicle check, and be empowered to carry passengers anywhere in the state without any limits on the number of badges issued.
Then come down on anybody who blows higher than .125 like a ton of bricks, with the same penalty for refusal to blow. No forfeiture until a conviction is obtained, but a conviction results in a 20 year loss of driving privileges.
Posted by: Will Allen at April 13, 2005 05:50 PMIts not always wise to shape public policy from personnel experience but I would think that expanded treatment options could be helpful. I really don't know if there is any truth to the statistic that 10% of the people drink 50% of the alcohol (its helpful so I'll quote it) but those 10% of the people are the real threat on the road. They are the people that blow 0.2, these are the people that are arressted 5-10-15 times fom drunk driving, these are the people that are arrested with suspended and revoked licenses. The solution to dropping the fatalities from drunken driving is to get these people to stop drinking. I would hope one could argue that the money spent on treating these people's alcoholism is less then the money in associated costs with their continued drinking (btw I am not arguing that people convicted 5-10-15 times shouldn't be locked, they should).
Posted by: paddy at April 13, 2005 06:49 PMThe 0.08 limit is poor law. 16 year olds driving and talking on cell phones and old people 70+ drive worse then someone who blows 0.08. 0.08 is nothing more then a moral judgement codified into law. Thanks MADD. Of course, a seventy year old talking on the cell phone after three beers is death on wheels but then maybe its just our time to go.
Where did you get your statistics for your graph?
Posted by: Mom at April 14, 2005 11:07 AMThey're in the linked story, from SUNY/Potsdam.
Posted by: mitch at April 14, 2005 01:30 PMMy first job out of college was as an Air Force Intelligence officer. And my first assignment was to Anchorage, Alaska. I arrived after the then-recent implementation of strict new drunk driving laws - your first offense dealt you 3 days in jail and a year's suspension of your license. No exceptions. Since Alaska did have a significant drunk driving problem, this severe remedy was adopted. In the time that we were there, it seemed to be working. As a military officer, a DWI would have been a *ahem* as we used to say...career-limiting experience. 3 days in jail was a pretty good trump card - I was all in favor of it. Maybe we should give it a try...instead of dribs and drabs, and a slap on a hand.
Jane N-B
Posted by: Jane N-B at April 14, 2005 11:30 PMwww.TwinCitiesRealEstateBlog.com
I just want to say that for those who may put themselves in drink and drive situations, please reflect over this tragedy that occurred. Realize that you don't need it to happen once to get the warning signs. THIS is the warning sign, and it could be your only one. Don't let this happen to you.
Posted by: Anonymous at April 15, 2005 07:14 PMAnne was an amazing women who made a mistake. She was my role model, my hero. Please do learn from her mistake, dont let it happen to you. But don't hate her for it. I loved her then, and I love her still. Everybody makes mistakes, and God forgives them. One day I hope to be just as strong and beautiful and wonderful as anne was.
Posted by: Whitney at April 10, 2006 02:12 PM