Obama's pick for traffic safety czar, Chuck Hurley, has never meet a regulation he does not like. He is the CEO of Mothers Against Drunk Driving. He wants to bring back the 55 mph speed limit and lower the allowable blood-alcohol content (BAC) for drivers to .04(one glass of wine). Chuck Hurley also supports random pullovers to make sure drivers aren't doing anything wrong. He does not understand the concept of presumption of innocence. Chuck Hurley is also part of a group lobbying for red light and speed cameras. We all want safe highways, but Mr. Hurley is clearly an extremist. The Senate should put him "on the road," not at the head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. According to this Washington Times editorial,
President Obama's pick to head the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration raises a few red flags. If confirmed by the Senate, Chuck Hurley, CEO of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, will drive motorists over the cliff with regulation.
The nation's traffic-safety czar has broad powers to control the roads and road-going habits of Americans. Mr. Hurley has a history of pushing laws that harass millions of law-abiding citizens to ensnare a few lawbreakers. He supports returning the 55 mph speed limit to our highways as well as roadblocks and random pullovers to make sure drivers aren't doing anything wrong. This methodology is based on a presumption of guilt - not innocence - of the average driver who is doing nothing wrong.
Mr. Hurley has promoted a mania of overregulation at MADD. Absent from his advocacies is the principle that a punishment should fit the crime, or that a crime even needs to be committed to incur a penalty. Under this influence, MADD has been lobbying to lower the allowable blood-alcohol content (BAC) for drivers to .04 - which means one glass of Pinot can land anyone behind bars. The constant lowering of BAC limits has separated what is punishable from what is actually dangerous.
2 comments:
Excellent post. I can't help but wonder what they are going to try to control next? And can anyone enlighten me when we became the Russia? What is with a "Czar" for every task? How about an "Executive Director"?
This is the inevitable path of government, Obama or no.
55 has been shown to increase both congestion and accidents, although it probably does reduce fatality in some cases.
For drunk driving I'd like to see an increase in penalties at the high end of BAC and a decrease a the low end. As far as impairment I'm sure that low a BAC is negligible, which brings up a stat I saw a while back. Apparently speaking on a cell phone impairs driving to bring your reaction time down to that of a 70 year old. They banned cell phones while driving in my state; why didn't they ban DWO (driving while old)? There are some big double standards going.
I've gone on at length about the problems raised by speed cameras. What gains we make in some areas, we lose in several others.
Post a Comment