Every 30 minutes, another person is killed by a drunk driver – so says one set of dramatic statistics often cited by anti-alcohol activist groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD). No doubt such a statistic should and does make an impact on anyone who hears it. Drunk driving is not a laughing matter, and it is most definitely a serious issue – however, the situation may not be nearly as grim as some make it out to be.
There’s a saying that 90% of all statistics can be made to say anything, 50% of the time. While this statement is obviously an exaggeration, it contains a grain of truth – statistics are not nearly as scientifically sound as many people would like to believe. In many cases, statistics become skewed (whether intentionally or unintentionally) and communicate a message inconsistent with the reality they are meant to depict. Could something like this happen in DWI-related research?
Alcohol-Related Incidents
If you believe the popular media, about 50% of all traffic fatalities are caused by the actions of people driving drunk. If you choose to find the truth yourself, you’ll probably come up with a percentage closer to 10%, according to the National Motorists Association – a significant drop, to say the least.
Why is the popularized figure so far off? One cause is an unfortunate confusion involving the term “alcohol-related incident.” In most cases, any traffic fatality in which someone involved has a measurable amount of alcohol in their system qualifies as an “alcohol-related incident.”
This applies even if the person with alcohol in their system was not physically or mentally impaired by alcohol in anyway, if he or she was not the cause of the accident, or even if he or she was an innocent pedestrian who was not behind the wheel at all. That is to say, if a sober driver is driving recklessly and kills a non-impaired pedestrian with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .01 (the legal limit is .08, for comparison), the incident will be classified as alcohol-related and spread over the media by special interest groups and politicians.
Politicization of the Issue
Unfortunately, efforts to actually deter drunk driving have been hindered by the sensationalist approach of the popular media, the single-minded crusade of biased interest groups, and the general politicization of the topic. Because dire DWI statistics make good news, promote interest groups’ narrow-minded agendas, and make for dramatic political speeches, they are often preferred in place of the truth.
Although the original goal of organizations like MADD (that is, the goal of preventing drunk driving) is a noble one, this goal has been perverted, becoming more about highly visible and politically attractive actions (sobriety roadblocks and checkpoints, for example) than about solutions which have been scientifically proven to work.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Joseph_Devine
