Blind, Deaf, & Dumb Feminism

Christian Party

The Dumb Feminist Education System

	Drivers with a BAC of less than 0.01 are 2.5 times more likely to have a fatal accident than drivers with a BAC greater than 0.01
	"Speeding-related crashes" are only 31.1% of all fatal crashes, making the non-speeding driver the worse driver
	The rate of "non-alcohol-related fatalities" in 1997 was equivalent to the rate of "alcohol-related fatalities" in 1987.
	"Alcohol-related fatalities" decreased 31.5% while "non-alcohol-related fatalities" increased 9.5%.
	The total number of lives estimated by NHTSA to have been saved by new laws exceeds actual lives saved by 10,122/year.
	AT BEST, the drinking & driving campaigs cost more than $4.1 million per life saved, and at worst the US spent $18 billion only to increase traffic fatalities by 2,670 per year.

The media reports the "good news" that "alcohol-related fatalities" in the US decreased by 38.5% since 1987, saving [an alleged] 7,452 lives last year". But it never mentions the 9.5% or 3,029 fatalities per year increase in the number of non-alcohol-related fatalities. How can it be considered "progress" when drivers are discouraged from drinking and driving AND when this increases the number of traffic fatalities of non-drinking by 3,029 lives per year?

Sanity checking this claim reveals the logical error of implementing a massive and expensive government program, of spending $18 billion per year to arrest drunk drivers. based solely on the false expectation that reducing the number of "alcohol-related fatalities" will reduce total traffic fatalities. Even IF it were assumed that the programs WERE responsible for saving all of the 4,423 lives saved last year (an impossibility), and that seat belts, air bags, minimum age drinking laws, motorcycle helmet laws, safer cars, and safer roads did not save even one life, spending $4.1 million per life saved makes no sense. Cancer takes 540,000 lives per year, yet total national cancer research amounts to less than $300 per life lost to cancer.

It is an indictment of the extremely poor quality of math education in the US that the public has not rejected the arrest of 1.5 million drivers each year to produce no tangible positive results. The NHTSA data shows an inverse relationship between reduced "alcohol-related fatalities" and the reduced traffic fatality rate. No evidence exists that this program has saved even one life.

The fatality rate per 100,000 population decreased from 19.2 per 100k population in 1987 to 15.7 in 1997, an 18.2% decrease in 10 years which saved 9,412 lives in 1997. NHTSA reports that 12,082 lives were saved last year from a combination of seat belt laws, minimum age drinking laws, and motorcycle helmet laws and 7,542 from reduced alcohol-related fatalities, for a total of 19,534 lives saved in 1997. The assertion that all of these new safety-related laws reduced the number of traffic fatalities by 10,122 MORE lives than the actual reduction in the fatality rate is evidence of a politically motivated, non-math-based agenda.

1997 Fatalities At 1987 Fatality Rate	51,379
Actual 1997 Fatalities	41,967
Actual Lives Saved From Reduction in Fatality Rate	9,412
Estimated Lives Saved by Drinking & Driving Laws	7,452
Estimated Lives Saved by Safety Belts	10,750
Estimated Lives Saved by Minimum Age Drinking Laws	846
Estimated Lives Saved by Motorcycle Helmet Laws	486
TOTAL Estimated Lives Saved by New Laws	19,534
Amount by Which NHTSA Estimated Lives Saved Exceeds Actual Lives Saved	10,122

Possible Scenarios

9,412 lives are saved each year due solely to safer roads, safer cars, and/or better driver training (an 18.2% reduction in the US fatality rate) and none of the above new laws had any impact at all.
The number of traffic fatalities in 1997 decreased by 12,082 due to safety belts, motorcycle helmets and under age drinking laws; safer roads, safer cars, and/or better driver training had no impact on highway safety at all; drinking and driving programs increased the percent of non-alcohol-related drivers who are 2.5 times more likely to have an accident than alcohol-related drivers, which increased traffic fatalities by 2,670 in 1997, for a net of 9,412 lives saved.

Alcohol-related Fatalities

The real error of logic is the use of the term "alcohol-related", which is defined in DOT HS 808 770 (available from http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov)as "at least one driver OR non-occupant [read: pedestrian] with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.01 grams per deciliter". It takes only one fifth of an ounce of alcohol to achieve a BAC of 0.01. The report focuses on the 16,189 "alcohol-related" fatalities while ignoriing the more than 1 1/5 times greater 25,778 non-alcohol-related fatalities. The report fails to note what percent of the general public has a BAC greater than 0.01 at any given time. It suggests that they know, but do not want you to know, that a higher percentage of the population has a BAC greater than 0.01 at any one time than the 38.5% of fatalities which are "alcohol-related".

Per capita alcohol consumption in the US is one of the lowest in the free world--with many European nations consuming more than 50% more alcohol per capita than us. Even so, the average of 2 gallons of alcohol per person consumed in the US is 300 ounces of alcohol per year for every man and woman of drinking age.

The amount of alcohol consumed in the US in ONE year is enough to maintain a BAC of 0.01 in each drinking-age American each and every day for 3 years.

A) 38.6% of the 41,967 traffic fatalities in 1997, or 16,189, were "alcohol-related".

B) The NHTSA defines alcohol-related as "either the driver or a nonoccupant having a bac (blood alcohol content) greater than 0.01 grams of alcohol per deciliter".

C) Stanford University found in a survey of random drivers and pedestrians that 61% had a bac greater than 0.01.

	ASSUMING THE ABOVE DATA TO BE CORRECT, AND EXCLUDING ALL OTHER DATA:
	61.4% / 39% = 1.57 fatal accident rate for BAC < 0.01.
	38.5% / 61% = 0.63 fatal accident rate for BAC > 0.01.
	Drivers with a BAC less than 0.01 are 2.5 times more likely to have a fatal accident than drivers with a BAC greater than 0.01.

Speeding-related Crashes

13,036 lives were allegedly lost to "speeding-related crashes", which is 31.1% of all fatal crashes.What is a "speeding-related crash", though? If the same strict standard as "alcohol-related crash" is used, then any accident involving any driver who was speeding at the time of the crash qualifies as "speeding-related". Easily, 90% of most drivers are speeding at any one time on the freeways. It is improbable that less than 31.1% of all drivers are not speeding at any one time. This means that the non-speeding driver is the most dangerous driver.

Traffic Fatalities from NHTSA per DOT HS 808 770

1987

1997

Difference

Percent

Total Fatalities

46,390

41,967

-4,423

-9.5%

Alcohol-related Fatalities (from 51% to 38.5%)

23,641