I don't think anyone would argue that the original intent of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) was a good idea and was focused to improve public safety.... Now some 20-plus years later MADD's influence and power to control legislation and law enforcement seems extremely unfair, unlogical and unconstitutional. Current laws influenced by MADD- Automatic loss of License for refusing a breath test- (without the right to counsel...!!!!), some states- Road Blocks and license checks without "any" or "just" cause....Charging DUI 2nd with no time limitations....Legislation that MADD is pursueing... dropping the legal limit from .08 to.05 which would "legally" make anyone "under the influence" having drank anything alcoholic....Wanting breath analyzers to be standard equiptment in all new cars.. And the list goes on... Is this use of lobbying influence unjust; bordering on socialism? Is their eventual desire to make alcohol illegal? It did'nt work with prohibition -why & how will it work now?
2006-12-28 12:51:58 · 10 answers · asked by Martini-69 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I don;t drink so it won't bother me one way or the other , but, it would seem that madd has accomplished their goal so it is about time they retired, and this should be transmitted to our lawmakers enough is enough, this good thing can go bad.
2006-12-28 13:10:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Drinking and driving is illegal, and the members of MADD are trying to help push legislation so that people who choose to drink and drive, will think twice before they actually think" It wont happen to me" I believe it will work as some who work together as a whole seem to have more pull. The more people who agree on the same issue and are more proactive on the same cause get the job done.
2006-12-28 13:00:11 · answer #2 · answered by nicholas k 1 · 1⤊ 2⤋
actually the drunk driving laws in most states are still a joke. I know so many people that have 7 & 8 DUI's and they still have drivers licenses. in some states a person will get less time for vehicular manslaughter than another who gets caught with one pound of marijuana, which is just wrong..
unfortunately the truth is that the law makers are scared to make the penalties for DUI to severe as one day they might find themselves folly to their own laws, as they themselves occasionally get behind the wheel when they shouldn't after drinking...
2006-12-28 13:22:52 · answer #3 · answered by lv_consultant 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
As a interest group, they have the right to influence laws because thats what interest groups do. MADD is going overboard with adding technology that intrudes in our cars (breathelyzers). In your terms, it sounds like they are skipping sociallism and going the an extreme political point of view (communism to the left, and fascism on the right)
2006-12-28 12:58:33 · answer #4 · answered by SteamedCopper 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No -- they're not trying to bring back prohibition. Drink as much as you want -- just don't get behind the wheel of a car afterward.
2006-12-28 12:54:24 · answer #5 · answered by Inquisitor-2006 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
join my group called DAMM drunks against MADD mothers
2006-12-29 06:56:45 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
faith has continuously been a social rigidity...its what our regulations are in protecting with...all regulations are in protecting with morality...traditionally faith has been the authority of morality in a fashion of existence...a faith would develop right into a cult at the same time as it strays from the mainstream non secular view...
2016-10-16 22:13:10 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Fine move to Pakistan where they kill you for the first offense.
2006-12-28 16:28:26 · answer #8 · answered by syaw10 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't drink... but I agree. They have gotten carried away with their demands.
2006-12-28 13:10:52 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Nope.Because you should not you could get killed.
2006-12-28 13:00:54 · answer #10 · answered by Najia A 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋