Scott Henson breaks down what’s on the neo-Prohibitionist agenda for 2009. It could be worse, but not by much. They want mandatory checkpoints for everyone, Fourth Amendment be damned. Meanwhile, the Dallas Morning News surprisingly quotes the other side of the argument.
These bills are “going after smaller and smaller groups of responsible adults who are drinking moderately,” said Sarah Longwell, the managing director of Washington-based American Beverage Institute, a trade association that represents major restaurants. “When they target people who are under .08 – say women who have had two glasses of wine – they are not going after the drunk driving problem.
No, but it does raise revenue through arrests of people who’ve had two drinks with dinner, and it makes MADD members feel good about themselves. And that’s what’s important. So there’s that.
thank you for calling MADD what they really are, a bunch of neo-prohibitionists. If I remember correctly even the founder of MADD has denounced the current program
Are there any studies which look at the effectiveness of such check points in preventing DWI deaths. There must be, but I can’t find them. If we are still ahead of CA in DWI deaths, is what we are doing effective? This sounds more like a bandaid than a solution.