1999 data but still interesting.
http://www.luhs.org/depts/injprev/Transprt/tran1-06.htm
Alcohol and Non-Alcohol Fatalities by Ethnic Group
Alcohol No Alcohol Percent Alcohol
White ——————– 65,309 82,737 44.1%
African American ——— 11,072 12,453 47.1%
Native American ———- 2,197 804 73.2%
Asian/Pacific Islander—- 1,094 2,942 27.1%
Mexican —————— 7,968 5,387 59.7%
Puerto Rican ————- 529 654 44.7%
Cuban ——————– 240 473 33.7%
Central/South American — 1,005 961 51.1%
Other Hispanic/Unknown — 1,834 1,657 52.5%
Total ——————– 91,248 108,068 45.8%
Note: Alcohol crash = fatality occurred in a crash in which at least one
active participant had a non-zero BAC.
Source: Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Prevention Research
Center, 1999.
This document was last updated on May 30, 1999.
On Mar 19, 9:49 pm, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
<xeton2…@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 1999 data but still interesting.
> http://www.luhs.org/depts/injprev/Transprt/tran1-06.htm
> Alcohol and Non-Alcohol Fatalities by Ethnic Group
> Alcohol No Alcohol Percent Alcohol
> White ——————– 65,309 82,737 44.1%
> African American ——— 11,072 12,453 47.1%
> Native American ———- 2,197 804 73.2%
> Asian/Pacific Islander—- 1,094 2,942 27.1%
> Mexican —————— 7,968 5,387 59.7%
> Puerto Rican ————- 529 654 44.7%
> Cuban ——————– 240 473 33.7%
> Central/South American — 1,005 961 51.1%
> Other Hispanic/Unknown — 1,834 1,657 52.5%
> Total ——————– 91,248 108,068 45.8%
> Note: Alcohol crash = fatality occurred in a crash in which at least one
> active participant had a non-zero BAC.
> Source: Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Prevention Research
> Center, 1999.
> This document was last updated on May 30, 1999.
Going strictly by percentages it appears OK, but anyone can manipulate
statistical reports to push a point.
Did you notice that the whiteys had more alcohol-related fatality
crashes than all other races COMBINED? Also true on non-alcohol
fatalities. That’s just raw numbers.
My counter-point: none of the races are worth a damn.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
MLOM wrote:
> On Mar 19, 9:49 pm, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"
> <xeton2…@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> 1999 data but still interesting.
>> http://www.luhs.org/depts/injprev/Transprt/tran1-06.htm
>> Alcohol and Non-Alcohol Fatalities by Ethnic Group
>> Alcohol No Alcohol Percent Alcohol
>> White ——————– 65,309 82,737 44.1%
>> African American ——— 11,072 12,453 47.1%
>> Native American ———- 2,197 804 73.2%
>> Asian/Pacific Islander—- 1,094 2,942 27.1%
>> Mexican —————— 7,968 5,387 59.7%
>> Puerto Rican ————- 529 654 44.7%
>> Cuban ——————– 240 473 33.7%
>> Central/South American — 1,005 961 51.1%
>> Other Hispanic/Unknown — 1,834 1,657 52.5%
>> Total ——————– 91,248 108,068 45.8%
>> Note: Alcohol crash = fatality occurred in a crash in which at least one
>> active participant had a non-zero BAC.
>> Source: Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Prevention Research
>> Center, 1999.
>> This document was last updated on May 30, 1999.
> Going strictly by percentages it appears OK, but anyone can manipulate
> statistical reports to push a point.
> Did you notice that the whiteys had more alcohol-related fatality
> crashes than all other races COMBINED? Also true on non-alcohol
> fatalities. That’s just raw numbers.
> My counter-point: none of the races are worth a damn.
You know, looking at these statistics in another way, they seem to imply
that Native Americans and Mexicans are the SAFEST drivers when SOBER.
The majority of their fatal accidents occur ONLY WHEN THEY ARE DRUNK!
At the other end, Asians/Pacific Islanders and Cubans seem to be bad
drivers even when driving sober.
- Peter
That is why the Gov of Iowa wont raise liquor taxes!
amazing and very sad.
Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS wrote:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> 1999 data but still interesting.
> http://www.luhs.org/depts/injprev/Transprt/tran1-06.htm
> Alcohol and Non-Alcohol Fatalities by Ethnic Group
> Alcohol No Alcohol Percent Alcohol
> White ——————– 65,309 82,737 44.1%
> African American ——— 11,072 12,453 47.1%
> Native American ———- 2,197 804 73.2%
> Asian/Pacific Islander—- 1,094 2,942 27.1%
> Mexican —————— 7,968 5,387 59.7%
> Puerto Rican ————- 529 654 44.7%
> Cuban ——————– 240 473 33.7%
> Central/South American — 1,005 961 51.1%
> Other Hispanic/Unknown — 1,834 1,657 52.5%
> Total ——————– 91,248 108,068 45.8%
> Note: Alcohol crash = fatality occurred in a crash in which at least one
> active participant had a non-zero BAC.
> Source: Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Prevention Research
> Center, 1999.
> This document was last updated on May 30, 1999.
Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS wrote:
> 1999 data but still interesting.
> http://www.luhs.org/depts/injprev/Transprt/tran1-06.htm
> Alcohol and Non-Alcohol Fatalities by Ethnic Group
> Alcohol No Alcohol
> Percent Alcohol
> White ——————– 65,309 82,737 44.1%
> African American ——— 11,072 12,453 47.1%
> Native American ———- 2,197 804 73.2%
> Asian/Pacific Islander—- 1,094 2,942 27.1%
<snip>
Many Asians don’t drink alcohol ! That probably helps their figures.
Graham
hondo <valen…@aol.com> wrote in news:45FF8F63.1F192959@aol.com:
> That is why the Gov of Iowa wont raise liquor taxes!
> amazing and very sad.
You mean there’s so many injuns and mexicans that he’s afraid he’d offend
them if he raised booze taxes?? That’s a damn poor reason and i’d like to
hear him tell that to the white parents who just had their kid killed by
some DUI injun.
BTW – I guess it’s true that injuns really can’t handle alcohol. It never
was part of their culture until the white man showed up 500 or so years ago
and so they haven’t developed a tolerance for it like europeans who’ve been
boozing for thousands of years.
On Mar 20, 10:33 am, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"
<xeton2…@yahoo.com> wrote:
> hondo <valen…@aol.com> wrote innews:45FF8F63.1F192959@aol.com:
> > That is why the Gov of Iowa wont raise liquor taxes!
> > amazing and very sad.
> You mean there’s so many injuns and mexicans that he’s afraid he’d offend
> them if he raised booze taxes?? That’s a damn poor reason and i’d like to
> hear him tell that to the white parents who just had their kid killed by
> some DUI injun.
> BTW – I guess it’s true that injuns really can’t handle alcohol. It never
> was part of their culture until the white man showed up 500 or so years ago
> and so they haven’t developed a tolerance for it like europeans who’ve been
> boozing for thousands of years.
True…prior to white man influence their drug of choice was
locoweed. They fried their brains by what they smoked rather than by
the drinks. I doubt white man knew of marijuana prior to entering
this continent.
It’s easy to find – on various official government public-health
agencies’ Web sites – information that "Hispanics" drive drunk at
double the rate of either European-Americans or black Americans,
though they don’t break out further WHICH Hispanic subcultures are
involved. That easily makes "Hispanics" the large group – by far –
having an unusually-high drunk-driving rate, as there just aren’t that
many American Indians left.
No $4 to park! No $6 admission! http://www.INTERNET-GUN-SHOW.com
Twenty something white airhead blonde females.
Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS wrote:
> hondo <valen…@aol.com> wrote in news:45FF8F63.1F192959@aol.com:
> > That is why the Gov of Iowa wont raise liquor taxes!
> > amazing and very sad.
> You mean there’s so many injuns and mexicans that he’s afraid he’d offend
> them if he raised booze taxes?? That’s a damn poor reason and i’d like to
> hear him tell that to the white parents who just had their kid killed by
> some DUI injun.
> BTW – I guess it’s true that injuns really can’t handle alcohol. It never
> was part of their culture until the white man showed up 500 or so years ago
> and so they haven’t developed a tolerance for it like europeans who’ve been
> boozing for thousands of years.
It’s apparently the same with aboriginals in Australia.
Graham
In article <jsKLh.129397$_73.43…@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
Peter Lawrence <hummb…@aol.com> wrote:
>You know, looking at these statistics in another way, they seem to imply
>that Native Americans and Mexicans are the SAFEST drivers when SOBER.
>The majority of their fatal accidents occur ONLY WHEN THEY ARE DRUNK!
>At the other end, Asians/Pacific Islanders and Cubans seem to be bad
>drivers even when driving sober.
Heh… you know, "How to Lie with Statistics", despite the name,
wasn’t really intended as a textbook
–
There’s no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.
On Mar 20, 7:30 pm, russo…@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew T. Russotto)
wrote:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> In article <jsKLh.129397$_73.43…@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
> Peter Lawrence <hummb…@aol.com> wrote:
> >You know, looking at these statistics in another way, they seem to imply
> >that Native Americans and Mexicans are the SAFEST drivers when SOBER.
> >The majority of their fatal accidents occur ONLY WHEN THEY ARE DRUNK!
> >At the other end, Asians/Pacific Islanders and Cubans seem to be bad
> >drivers even when driving sober.
> Heh… you know, "How to Lie with Statistics", despite the name,
> wasn’t really intended as a textbook
> —
> There’s no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
> result in a fully-depreciated one.
S&DDAM doesn’t think it’s a textbook but rather a Bible.
"edi…@netpath.net" <edi…@netpath.net> wrote in
news:1174406917.558706.161590@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com:
> It’s easy to find – on various official government public-health
> agencies’ Web sites – information that "Hispanics" drive drunk at
> double the rate of either European-Americans or black Americans,
> though they don’t break out further WHICH Hispanic subcultures are
> involved. That easily makes "Hispanics" the large group – by far –
> having an unusually-high drunk-driving rate, as there just aren’t that
> many American Indians left.
I’ve been saying the same thing for years. In beanerland, speeding and
drunk driving are totally accepted !!! That’s why i say no more mexicans
in america, legal or illegal.
On Mar 19, 7:41 pm, "Fred G. Mackey" <nos…@dont.spam> wrote:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> http://www.fortcollinsforumonline.com/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=138
> Check out "Ask The Investigator"’s reply to the second question.
> <quote>
> A. Frank, alarm companies and monitoring services provide a very
> important function for most families and I do recommend them whenever
> finances will allow, however, every situation is different. I know that
> this may sound simple, but on your automotive key ring you have buttons
> for locking/unlocking your car doors and trunk. The red button is a
> "panic button". If you hear someone breaking into your home – push the
> car "panic button". Your car horn will go off and scare off the burglar.
> You just need to push it once – it will continue to honk, until someone
> turns it off, or the battery dies . Be sure and tell your neighbors if
> they hear the horn go off the call 911 – and you can do the same for
> them. Good luck – I hope this helps.
> </quote>
> The "Investigator"’s e-mail address is on the page linked above.
> Perhaps someone should ask him if anyone really pays attention to car
> alarms.
> He seems to think so, but maybe he should actually "investigate" it.
Those car alarms are going off so often, for no reason, that I ignore
them completely, hoping only that the idiot owner will shut it off
sometime soon. Usually I hope that the alarm will act as a decoy,
attracting thieves to cars that might be so valuable that the idiot
owner put an alarm in it.
websu…@cox.net wrote:
> On Mar 19, 7:41 pm, "Fred G. Mackey" <nos…@dont.spam> wrote:
> Those car alarms are going off so often, for no reason, that I ignore
> them completely,
Where do you live? A trailer park? I actually heard a car alarm the
other day. That makes twice in at least 6 months. It seems there is an
epidemic here.
> hoping only that the idiot owner will shut it off
> sometime soon. Usually I hope that the alarm will act as a decoy,
> attracting thieves to cars that might be so valuable that the idiot
> owner put an alarm in it.
LOL – usually, the false alarms are in POS cars that are at least 10
years old – back in the day when it was common for false alarms to occur.
On Mar 21, 7:26 pm, "Fred G. Mackey" <nos…@dont.spam> wrote:
> I do find it convenient to walk away from my car and know that I’ve
> armed it without having to look at the lights.
It’s "inconvenient" to look at your car as you walk away???????????
sigh….
websu…@cox.net wrote:
> On Mar 21, 7:26 pm, "Fred G. Mackey" <nos…@dont.spam> wrote:
>>I do find it convenient to walk away from my car and know that I’ve
>>armed it without having to look at the lights.
> It’s "inconvenient" to look at your car as you walk away???????????
Well, it’s not the prettiest car in the world, and more often than not
it does need washing.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> sigh….
websu…@cox.net wrote in
news:1174532795.064931.35920@y66g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:
> On Mar 21, 7:26 pm, "Fred G. Mackey" <nos…@dont.spam> wrote:
>> I do find it convenient to walk away from my car and know that I’ve
>> armed it without having to look at the lights.
> It’s "inconvenient" to look at your car as you walk away???????????
> sigh….
Maybe it’s shielded by some big honking SUV.
Maybe I’ve turned a corner by then.
WHATS the BIG DEAL?
I get woken up more by the college students who are in and out at all hours
of the day and night(and by fartcan "mufflers" and motorcycles) than I do
by alarms chirping,AND I live in an apt. complex,not some subdivision.
At least there’s SOME excuse for car alarms;MCs and fartcan "mufflers" are
just intentional noise,and are technically illegal anyways.
–
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
Jim Yanik wrote:
> websu…@cox.net wrote in
> news:1174532698.316306.48470@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com:
> My alarm passive-arms after 30 seconds,and by that time,I’m too far away to
> see any lights,but I CAN hear the arming chirp.(if that little chirp wakes
> you up,then you ARE too sensitive,and also have the worst sound insulation
> in your abodes!)
> IMO,you folks are just too sensitive and touchy.
I agree with you on that. No matter where you live, there WILL be some
noises (whether its sirens, gunshots, trains, motorcycles, coyotes,
crickets, or the howling of the wind).
> BTW,it’s been more than a week and I have not heard any false alarms in my
> apt.complex. I haven’t heard any alarms going off.
I heard an alarm over the weekend, but it was the first I’d heard in at
least 6 months. I don’t know if it was a false alarm or not – if it had
gone off much longer, I would have investigated.
What I found more annoying was a dog barking – one of my neighbors
apparently just acquired a schauzer – goddammed useless dog that loves
to bark for no reason. It deprived me of a much needed nap the other day.
> IMO,you schmucks would rather someone’s car get broken into or vandalized
> than hear an alarm go off,false or not.
Yep – better someone’s car get broken into than they be disturbed for a
minute or two.
On Mar 21, 9:39 pm, Jim Yanik <jya…@abuse.gov> wrote:
> I get woken up more by the college students who are in and out at all hours
> of the day and night(and by fartcan "mufflers" and motorcycles) than I do
> by alarms chirping,AND I live in an apt. complex,not some subdivision.
> At least there’s SOME excuse for car alarms;MCs and fartcan "mufflers" are
> just intentional noise,and are technically illegal anyways.
I’d like to get rid of THOSE annoying, purposeless noises as well.