MADD’s vision for Texas

MADD has a vision for Texas drinking laws. On the MADD website you can learn about the “loopholes” in Texas drinking laws. MADD tells us that we will not be safe in the Lone Star State until we have Keg Registration, Anti Plea Bargaining Laws, Mandatory BAC testing of all DEAD drivers, Social Host Liability, lower BAC, and Sobriety Checkpoints.

MADD has lied to us before. They promised that lowering the BAC to .08 would save lives. It didn’t. We have cops wasting time arresting .08 drivers. Drivers who rarely cause fatal accidents. That time is not being spent on .20 drivers, rapists, or finding missing sex offenders.

Keg Registration? What point doest that serve? MADD hates social drinking. No lives will be saved with keg registration. It has nothing to do with DWI.

Anti Plea Bargaining Laws. MADD want to outlaw the practice of changing DWI cases to “Obstructing a Highway” etc. That will lead to less cases being filed, more DWI’s being dismissed, and more weak DWI’s being tried in zero tolerance jurisdictions. If you want to pour cement into the criminal justice system an anti-plea bargaining law is a great start.

Testing the BAC of all dead drivers. Who does MADD think they are? If your loved one has a heart attack and dies in a car what business is that of MADD’s? Disgusting.

Sobriety Checkpoints. A hallmark of the police state. Random, suspicion less searches of the citizenry. MADD loves sobriety checkpoints. Too bad studies show they are a waste of tax dollars.

Labels: ,

Posted in:

6 responses to “MADD’s vision for Texas”

  1. <img src="http://www.blogge says:

    MADD is scary, because they have built a lot of clout with the public and the system. They are not what they appear to be. You are right. I have never seen a driver going down the road drinking from a keg. Texas is one of the few states that don’t allow sobriety check points because of the obvious: No probable cause. MADD would like to just scuttle all that pesky constitutional nonsense, and unfortunately they are succeeding way beyond what is comfortable to me. The “court monitoring” program, where they go try to pressure courts with their presence is double scary, especially since they are using my money to do it.

  2. <img src="http://www.blogge says:

    Hi, Robert!Periodically I search blogs to see what people are thinking when it comes to MADD. I have been employed by MADD for two years and have taken a fairly objective view of MADD’s messaging. Many of your comments are questions I get to answer when I am out in the field speaking to different groups. I would enjoy the opportunity to chat with you…just open dialogue I swear…about what we actually do. If you have an interest, please email me at

  3. <img src="http://www.blogge says:

    Jackie,Thanks for your comments. I just sent you an email. I would love to have a discussion on MADD’s policies. I respect any organization that is actually willing to answer it’s critics.

  4. <img src="http://www.blogge says:

    Jackie –Please ask your officious cabals to stay out of the courtroom during trials. It makes the jury uncomfortable. It undermines the constitutional rights of the defendant. It makes the DA feel pressured, and thus more likely to screw up. And it really annoys the bailiffs because they have to stay on their toes in case there is a fracas arising from your presence.

  5. <img src="http://www.blogger.c says:

    well, the real problem is the american view of drinking. I was talking to a guy from Germany, where they really like their beer. He told me they do not have the drunk driving issues there they do here. It takes much longer and costs more to get a drivers license. Further, kids grow up seeing having a beer or two as normal..not as some crazed rite of passage that you have to go overboard on. there is much less drunk driving there than here. I think the real issue is the forbidden fruit aspect of alcohol coupled with the mixed messages that alcohol companies send that a good time is better if you’re bombed. More laws are really just bandaids

  6. <img src="http://www.blogger.c says:

    THERE ARE LOOPHOLES…Like most people, I take an occasional drink, so I’m not a prohibitionist. In my fraternity days, I learned not everyone can control themselves, and drinking is one area the indivdual should control because irresponsibility can kill innocent people.My estranged wife and I have five minor children. I have full custody of the three older kids (she and her boyfriend didn’t weant them) and she has tempoary custody of the two youngest, girls 8 and 11 (Madison and Alyssa). I lve in SC; she in Lipan, Texas. Both her and boyfriend are into being high, however they can get there. On Father’s Day, they were driving drunk in Palo Pinto County when boyfriend lost control of his car. They had four children in the back seat, two belts. My two daughters were included. DPS says was going over 90 mph. He spun and went into a ditch. He could have flipped the car; they might have all been killed. There might have been a car coming; a collison and they might have all been killed. The result? He is charged with DWI Felony. The loophole; she is not charged with anything. The reality is that she was more responsible for my two daughters being in the car than he was. The law seems to put all responsibility on the driver. As drunk as he was, and since she had been drinking with him she was fully aware that he was #faced, she was as responsible as he, but no prosecution. Not even a slap on the wrist.

Contact Information