You have implied it extensively with your support of this device in everyone's vehicle.
I think it’s quite arguable whether society would benefit from your alcoholic hubby having such a device in his car and/or any car he routinely drove, including yours.
Someone else on this long thread commented upon your reading comprehension problems, I have to agree with them. I referred to my 1st husband and alcohol abuse and he is not someone I have EVER referred to as "hubby". Your broad brush comment insulted my husband, who, as I informed you, consumed no alcohol this evening because he was driving.
BTW - the first husband died more than a year ago. Nothing to do with alcohol, complications of MS.
But I REALLY HATE kids getting killed by drunk drivers . . . and worse . . . burned to death. And, if they were your kids or kids you loved, I’d think you’d really hate it, too.
I know of no one who would disagree with you.
My best friend's niece, a friend of my daughter's, a child who had been at my home on numerous occassions, was killed in a headon collission on New Year's Day. Her mother was at fault in that crash, which also killed the 2 people in the other car. SHE WAS STONE COLD SOBER.
10 people were injured and a 10 year old child was killed in a crash on Sunday, no alcohol was involved. 3 of the children including the child who died were in my daughter's karate class.
I know far more people that were killed in motor vehicle crashes that did NOT involve alcohol than I know, rather knew, who were killedin crashes that did involve alcohol.
I utterly abhor statistics. They do nothing more than help to push the agenda of those behind the creation of them.
The vast majority of accidents on the highway do not have anything to do with alcohol, and of those that do, about half were caused by someone other than the impaired driver. They just happen to involve someone who had been drinking.
Please show me each line where I’ve explicitly
ADVOCATED putting it in everyone’s vehicle.
Statistics can be useful in assessing many thigns.
But one needs to know how they were arrived at and how plausible in practical terms it is to infer therefore what’s from them.
Citing the numbers killed without alcohol might be useful in some contexts and arguments. Doesn’t have any relevance for me in this discussion.
It doesn’t matter THAT much how many folks are killed in non-alcohol involved accidents. That’s a serious concern—but not my concern on this thread.
My concern is the insidious and preventable horrid deaths from alcohol. Any of those is too many.