Drink Driving

37% of the total annual car accidents in the United States are caused by drink drivers and in California specifically the statistic is 35%. The percentage is fairly high considering and you have to wonder why? Now you are probably expecting me to start talking about irresponsible youths blah de la but I have to say I blame the public transport systems. Unless you live in a city over here getting a taxi is borderline impossible. I first realised this up in Mariposa when Kyle and I wanted to attend a party and had to drag his poor Dad out at 2am to pick us up. Any form of public transport just wasn't available. Lucky for us we had a kind, though slightly wiery Pops willing to pick us up but had he not we would have either had to sleep over at the party house or drive home. No choice. One of us could have been DD (Designated Driver) but everyone knows that is never as fun and had a taxi just been available then the problem would have been solved. The same can be said for the downtown transport systems too. Granted taxis are readily available but at hyped prices and there aren't any late night bus facilities, similar to London's, on offer at all. Considering the amount of socialisers that flock from Pacific/Mission Beach to downtown every weekend, I am fairly sure a profit could be made on a scheduled coach or two leaving at 2.30am on Friday and Saturday nights.

It seems like the way the drink driving problem is being dealt with is via pumped up punishments and embedding a fear factor in all drivers. It seems fairly easy to get a DUI (Driving Under the Influence) and I am not saying drivers who blow a 0.08 or more shouldn't be punished but there are parts of the rule that don't make sense. For example, anyone under the age of 21 who blows even a 0.01 on the breathaliser gets an automatic DUI whether or not they deserve it. For example, if a 20 1/2 year old drives his/her's very drunk friends home from a party (who would've driven themselves alternatively) and blows a 0.01, they get their license taken off them for a year and a 5 year probationary period. Even if they were doing the right thing in the situation. Even if they are technically saving two other peoples lives and possible others. It just doesn't seem fair. Surely if the public transport systems were more efficient then the problems would reduce enormously as people would have options. At least back in Britain we know we deserve a drink driving fine if we get one because we have so many options for alternative means of transport. Never is one not obtainable. Obviously our transport systems have to cover a lot less land but we also have a lot less people paying taxes to improve these things so the argument doesn't really stand. The drink driving problem does need to be eradicated but at this point I am not surprised people drink and drive. What other choice do they have?