My gripe is MADD’s original sole goal was getting a legal limit for drunk driving and an appropriate consequence for it. They succeeded, and each time they succeed they change what their mission is. Here in Canada they’re part of the reason liquor stores close so early or aren’t open on weekends in different provinces.
Again, I don’t drink so whatever, but my complaint is they just don’t stop and go “ok we won let’s shut it down” instead they change the goal and keep pushing harder. I think they might reach a crisis point if they manage to prohibit alcohol again, but I guess then they just start lobbying for harsher laws on other drugs.
Liquor stores being closed on the weekend always bothered me. It sounds like a minor inconvenience, but if you’re a hardcore alcoholic then being cut off from your supply for a weekend can kill you.
It feels like a thorny thing too, because like, I get their mission. Drunk driving kills people, so campaigning to stop people from getting killed feels noble. But banning substances has been proven time and time again to cause more harm than good because if people can’t get their fix safely, then they’ll get it unsafely.
A bit of a tangent, but I think about people who campaign against needle exchange programs and injection sites. They probably believe they’re doing good because it’s very easy to see how drugs can ruin lives. I think it’s also a natural but naive outlook to think that if your city is facing a drug problem then these programs can be seen as encouraging drug use.
But shutting down these programs doesn’t fix the reasons why people struggle with addiction. A person will continue to get their fix, even if that means they have to share needles, even if it means injecting in a public bathroom or at the library. Shutting down those programs makes the drug problems more visible, more dangerous, and can lead to a public health crisis. Not to mention being away from medical staff makes overdoses deadlier.
Back to booze, you can look at the Temperance movement and the Prohibition era as a fine example of when things go too far. There you had people who thought they were doing the right thing - but their actions indirectly (and sometimes directly) lead to more deaths.
Do I think MADD is going down the same road? Today, probably not. But if they keep shifting the goalposts, then who knows where their future leads?
Yeah I agree completely, and I also agree with MADDs original mission: make tangible consequences for driving drunk.
They achieved it, and like you say having stores closed on a weekend means an alcoholic might turn to isopropyl alcohol, washing alcohol, hand sanitizer .etc it isn’t going to make them stop… If anything it shifts the burden onto our already overtaxed healthcare system as alcoholics destroy their bodies even more.
Edit: it also turns out most provinces have moved away from doing this, since most of them closed on at least Sunday.
My gripe is MADD’s original sole goal was getting a legal limit for drunk driving and an appropriate consequence for it. They succeeded, and each time they succeed they change what their mission is. Here in Canada they’re part of the reason liquor stores close so early or aren’t open on weekends in different provinces.
Again, I don’t drink so whatever, but my complaint is they just don’t stop and go “ok we won let’s shut it down” instead they change the goal and keep pushing harder. I think they might reach a crisis point if they manage to prohibit alcohol again, but I guess then they just start lobbying for harsher laws on other drugs.
Liquor stores being closed on the weekend always bothered me. It sounds like a minor inconvenience, but if you’re a hardcore alcoholic then being cut off from your supply for a weekend can kill you.
It feels like a thorny thing too, because like, I get their mission. Drunk driving kills people, so campaigning to stop people from getting killed feels noble. But banning substances has been proven time and time again to cause more harm than good because if people can’t get their fix safely, then they’ll get it unsafely.
A bit of a tangent, but I think about people who campaign against needle exchange programs and injection sites. They probably believe they’re doing good because it’s very easy to see how drugs can ruin lives. I think it’s also a natural but naive outlook to think that if your city is facing a drug problem then these programs can be seen as encouraging drug use.
But shutting down these programs doesn’t fix the reasons why people struggle with addiction. A person will continue to get their fix, even if that means they have to share needles, even if it means injecting in a public bathroom or at the library. Shutting down those programs makes the drug problems more visible, more dangerous, and can lead to a public health crisis. Not to mention being away from medical staff makes overdoses deadlier.
Back to booze, you can look at the Temperance movement and the Prohibition era as a fine example of when things go too far. There you had people who thought they were doing the right thing - but their actions indirectly (and sometimes directly) lead to more deaths.
Do I think MADD is going down the same road? Today, probably not. But if they keep shifting the goalposts, then who knows where their future leads?
Yeah I agree completely, and I also agree with MADDs original mission: make tangible consequences for driving drunk.
They achieved it, and like you say having stores closed on a weekend means an alcoholic might turn to isopropyl alcohol, washing alcohol, hand sanitizer .etc it isn’t going to make them stop… If anything it shifts the burden onto our already overtaxed healthcare system as alcoholics destroy their bodies even more.
Edit: it also turns out most provinces have moved away from doing this, since most of them closed on at least Sunday.
Thanks for more of the background esp with Canada. Yeah fuck them