- Joined
- Jan 18, 2008
- Messages
- 12,729
- Reaction score
- 4,899
I think...we're in agreement. I didn't mean to say anything about the MLDA causing any sort of impact, I was just trying to say that it would be pointless to lower the MLDA since it wouldn't have any effect, so I guess what I am saying is that I agree that they should not have bothered at all with that notion since people will still drink and drive.The purpose of lowering the MLDA is that it would eliminate drinking as some sort of right of passage, since you can do it at any age. The MLDA didn't reduce the amount of motor vehicle fatalities, it only displaced them to a later age group... the reduction in fatalities that you see in most literature doesn't take into account that most states also mandated other things - including seat belt laws - at the same time. Here is research that is largely ignored: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1000359 (you can read a summary here: http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/532)
I'm just happy people haven't resorted to the lead-infused bathtub gin of the early 1900s when prohibition was in effect.