Saturday, June 1, 2013

DUI DIshonor Roll

 Drivers age 21-24 make up highest percentage of drunk driver arrests (34%)

Thankfully we only had one DUI arrest last weekend, let's hope the trend continues.  But then, it only takes one to forever change innocent lives and loving families.

Click to enlarge.  Note busy intersection where arrest took place


Dr. Ed said...

Larry, just for fun sometime, it would be really interesting to see a gender breakdown of not only OUI but traffic offenses in general.

The stereotype is that it is the male who does this sort of stuff, and young men pay almost twice what young women do for auto insurance -- gender equity stuff notwithstanding.

But I'm seeing a lot of clearly female names on these arrests, and if (hypothetically) the majority of the 'dangerous' drivers are female, it does give a totally new meaning to the term 'crazy woman driver', doesn't it?

Anonymous said...

Wow "Dr. Ed Cutting" just when I think you can't be a total ass you prove me wrong.

Anonymous said...

...just for fun...??

You are a misogynistic creep.

Anonymous said...

So, Anon 8:19 PM, are you arguing that "Chelsea Lynne" isn't a 24-year-old woman, or that the APD ought not have arrested "her" for drunk driving, or that driving drunk is "crazy"?

Or are you arguing that the evil & insensitive APD refused to arrest "him" in "his" name and instead insisted on using a name and gender identity that "he" doesn't use?

Or are you opposed to objective research to verify on a quantitative basis a qualitative observation?

Wasn't the driver going the wrong way on 116 (and who killed someone doing so) a woman? And wasn't it kinda "crazy" to drive so drunk that you are on the wrong damn side if a divided highway?

Anonymous said...

7:04am WTF are you talking about. Please don't mate with Ed, the outcome would be scary.

Anonymous said...

That's funny, I thought 7:04 am WAS Ed....

Dr. Ed said...

Wishing to have social policy based upon accurate statistical information constitutes being a "misogynistic creep"?

What then do you call the people who argue (incorrectly, incidentally) that a woman only earns 73 cents on the dollar a man earns?

If insurance rates -- which reflect risk to the insurance company -- are to be different for male and female drivers, as sexist as that may be, ought they not at least accurately reflect the risk today in 2013 and not back in 1950?

It's like Breast Cancer. Not only do the most women die of the same thing that kills the most men (heart attacks & strokes) but it isn't even the most fatal cancer in women.

No, Lung Cancer is -- because in 2013, a lot of women are smoking. Is recognizing this being a "misogynistic creep" or accurately assessing the risk of cancer to women? Aren't women entitled to know this?

Should we not tell young ladies that those cigarettes well might kill them? Who is the "misogynistic creep" if we don't????

Anonymous said...

Wishing to have social policy based upon accurate statistical information constitutes being a "misogynistic creep"?

No, wanting to do a gender analysis of OUI's, seeking to prove that women drivers make up the majority of dangerous drivers, "just for fun", and seeking to reinforce a stereotype of females being "crazy women drivers" makes you a misogynistic creep.

Ed, stop digging yourself deeper, just don't respond.