Do you support liberty
and justice for all?

The drinking age is a
Help spread the word!

     An organized hate group has scheduled events in Florida to raise money to spend promoting hate crimes. You can address these people at their own fund-raisers.

     Many civil rights activists are quick to respond if an innocent person is being maliciously mistreated because of his or her race, sex, religion or even sexual orientation. They have some explaining to do if they are silent now.

     The hate group calls itself “Mothers Against Drunk Driving,” but they are not all mothers, and they are not against drunk driving. Their target is everybody born during the past 21 years.

     MADD pushes politicians to use gun-toting goons in bulletproof vests to intimidate Mr. and Mrs. Twenty into total abstinence from alcoholic beverages, and to intimidate businesses into refusing to sell alcoholic beverages to Mr. and Mrs. Twenty.

     Of course, it is obvious why so many politicians would rather commit this hate crime against persons younger than 21, than impose tougher DUI measures which would apply to the politicians themselves. That wouldn’t be fair to the hypocrites, who “can drive better drunk than teenagers can sober.”

     It is not so obvious what motivates the hate-mongering MADD bigots, so some explaining is needed.

     MADD is sponsored by auto makers, who want to perpetuate the intense bureaucratic hostility against persons who don’t buy cars. This hostility is manifested in numerous ways, including traffic lights without crosswalk lights, streets without sidewalks, snow plowed onto sidewalks and left there until it melts in the springtime, mandatory apartment house parking lots which do the walker no good but drive up his or her rent, and zoning restrictions which prevent walkers from living closer to work.

     The more a young adult drinks alcohol, the more he or she will avoid driving. That person will do more walking and then demand equal rights for pedestrians.

     A serious crackdown on drunk driving, making laws in the U.S.A. comparable to those in other countries, would mean more bus riders, and the bus companies could extend their hours and routes. More young folks could find jobs without buying cars. MADD wants to get these young persons addicted to driving. Our nation’s youth are tomorrow’s leaders, and MADD wants them to show the same depraved indifference to the rights of pedestrians that so many of today’s politicians show.

     Some MADD activists, having lost a family member, are desperately trying to pretend their own past DUI crimes are not their own fault, but the fault of a society that was soft on underage drinking. Some cannot even picture somebody drinking alcohol and then not driving, while others cannot live with the fact that, every day, many thousands of persons younger than 21 imbibe and then don’t drive.

     It’s not that they are all morons. It’s just that good, sound, logical reasoning does not support their cause, so they rely on bad reasoning: “Statistical analysis of historical crash data proves that the United States of America ought not to be a free country, with liberty and justice for all, where the citizen decides what to drink, be it water, wine or turpentine, and where the drunk driver is the one who gets punished for drunk driving.”

     Insurance companies have little choice but to classify people. It’s bad enough that a good driver, such as a single man with a clean record, has to pay the same as a married woman with two moving violations. He has to pay higher rates, for the ones who drive like jackasses. However, there’s a big difference between insurance and the right to liberty.

     The right to liberty is not a gift from the government, doled out at the discretion of politicians. Liberty is an unalienable right, which no government can justly infringe. Liberty can only be meaningfully defined as the freedom to do whatever does not violate anybody’s rights, and a person is not violating anybody’s rights by drinking and not driving. Since unalienable rights inhere in the individual, the only relevant statistics are statistics about that individual, not crimes committed by other persons.

     MADD will argue that too many young persons have been killed in DUI crashes, which is true. Notice I didn’t say “accidents” because so many crashes aren’t accidents at all. Well, consider the crash in Burton, Ohio on 2 March 2006. The guilty driver was 47. He was driving drunk (0.26% BAC), driving left of center, speeding, driving under suspension and leading a police chase, but at least he wasn’t drinking under age, a victory for MADD. He crashed head on into a car with three outvoted discrimination victims, but at least he wasn’t buying for them, another victory for MADD. While he collected his eleven prior DUI’s MADD pushed for sting operations, keg registration laws, counterfeit-resistant ID’s and harsher punishments for being younger than 21. They don’t care about drunk driving, they just hate everybody younger than 21.

     Grace Chamberlain and Andrew Hopkins were both 18, and they never got a chance to drink alcohol legally. A 19-year-old man in the back seat spent weeks in Metro Hospital, getting his face put back together with plates and screws.

     Outraged and stunned, the survivor, the victims’ parents and fellow students at Hiram College went to Columbus to lobby for a crackdown. They got a tougher repeat offender law introduced, overwhelmingly passed and signed by the governor. Citizens who want results don’t need MADD.

     While you’re lobbying, don’t forget all the other senseless crashes, where alcohol wasn’t a factor. A pedestrian crossing the street is lucky to get white paint to mark a crosswalk. When a train crosses the street, there are clanging bells, flashing lights and descending gates. That’s because a train endangers persons in cars, persons who matter.

     Notice how they were so strongly impelled to stop the carnage, that they raised the drinking age, and then they also raised the speed limits? That’s because the speed limits apply to persons who matter.
Thought Experiment
Suppose the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) strikes down the underage drinking statutes. What do you think State legislators would do?

If you said they would scramble to pass tougher measures against DUI, then you just admitted that they impose underage drinking laws instead of passing tougher measures against DUI.

     The hate-mongering MADD bigots can be found and addressed at their events on public property:

     Pensacola, Escambia County, 16 September 2017 Click

     Fort Myers, Lee County, 30 September 2017 Click

     Largo, Pinellas County, 14 October 2017 Click

     Lakeland, Polk County, 28 October 2017 Click

     Orange Park, Clay County, 4 November 2017 Click

     Tell the event sponsors what you think of their promoting of hate crimes against persons younger than 21. If you are approached by somebody planning to participate in the event, asking for your donation, ask them if they are aware that MADD hates everybody born during the past 21 years.
The drinking age is a
Don’t promote hate crimes.

...and why should they sign up and fight to defend your country when you won’t even vote to protect their unalienable right to liberty?