Fatal Accident Reporting System
"The analysis by Connolly, Kimball, and Moulton (1989) mentioned above suggests that female drivers have both a higher overall crash risk and a higher alcohol-related fatal-crash risk. Combined data from FARS and the 1986 National Roadside Breathtesting Survey suggest that the relative fatal-crash risk of a female driver with a BAC of 0.10% or more could be of the order of 50% higher than it is for a male driver at the same BAC. Of course, estimates based on these two unmatched data sets are, as indicated above, are only very rough, but they are consistent with prior case-control studies (see Jones and Joscelyn 1978). "
The second statement above is a complete and total misrepresentation of the data, and it's their own FARS database which proves it. Researching a number of different years in this database indicates that the general trend of drinking and driving is that about ten percent of the more than 100,000 people involved in fatal accidents each year are reported by the police as alcohol involved:
This is 147% of all the people involved in fatal accidents who police report each year are alcohol involved. Where is the DRUNK driver who the above statement implies is the one who allegedly causes 38-49% of all fatal accidents each year, or as Justice Roberts puts it, 14,000 accidents annually? And what about the role of women drivers who NHTSA claims are 50% more likely to have a fatal accident than men drivers, versus drinking men drivers with a BAC of 0.12 who are only 30% more? Or Hispanic drivers whose brethren in Mexico are, according to the World Health Organization, 5 TIMES more likely per car than the average American driver to have a fatal accident, or Blacks whose brethren in the Central African Republic who are 590 TIMES as likely?
Ten Thousand Police Reported Alcohol Involvement Cases Annually
Now of course there is some overlap between these various factors which would explain why they add up to 134% of the Police Reported Alcohol Involvement. For example, if 2% of the drowsy drivers were also young drivers, then the total would be only 145%. And if half of those who were not a fatality were also passengers or pedestrians, then the total would be only 127.5%. And if the 1% who are drug involved were also young drivers, then the total would be only 126.5%.
So now how many fatal accidents are left over to be BLAMED on drunk drivers being the CAUSE of (not just involved in) these accidents? None? Doesn't this suggest that drunk drivers are the SAFEST drivers?
Research it yourself. There are many different ways to view this, and you might get a more accurate reading. If you do, please let us know so it can be included on the following list.
When counted by race, of 84,026 persons involved in fatal accidents in 2008, 46,669 were not a fatality, 7,763 were marked "blank", and 2,966 were marked "unknown". Of the 26,628 fatalities whose race was known or specified, 21,939 or 82.4% were White,13.4% were Black, 23,355 or 87.7% were non-Hispanic, and 2,241 or 8.4% were Hispanic.
In 2008, there were 1,799 drivers whose accidents were attributed to drowsy driving, which is 2.7% of the 66,244 drivers who were involved in fatal accidents. 87 of the accidents involving the 2,247 drivers with a BAC > .10 or 4% of them were attributed to drowsy driving.
Ignoring the above facts, and ASSUMING that 10% of all fatal accidents involve a driver with a BAC greater than 0.10 (drunk drivers, that 90% involve only drivers with a BAC < 0.10 (sober drivers),and that only 30% of all drivers have a BAC greater than 0.10:
Modified Sunday, October 24, 2010
Copyright @ 2007 by Fathers' Manifesto & Christian Party