The full spectrum.

The ABA Law Journal has a story about Warren Redlich, a Florida attorney who has some interesting suggestions for how to behave at a drunken-driving checkpoint. Mr. Redlich is the founder of Fair DUI.

Mr. Redlich advises motorists facing these checkpoints to hang a plastic baggie to the exterior of their car. The baggie should contain the driver's licence, registration, proof of insurance, and a flyer that says "I remain silent," "no searches," and "I want my lawyer."  According to Mr. Redlich the purpose of the flier is to protect drivers from bad cops.  You can see a video of Mr. Redlich following his own advice here.

So that is one way to handle the possibility of being stopped on suspicion of drunk driving.  A counter example comes from Freeborn County, Minnesota.  Fox 9 News has the story of a woman who had a blood alcohol content of .45%.  The story notes that this is more than 5 times the legal limit for driving in Minnesota and was the highest.  recorded in the state during the month of December.  The story also notes that the woman was found passed out in the driveway of a home owned by a trooper with the Minnesota State Patrol.

The fact that the woman was passed out in a state trooper's driveway intrigued the Fox 9 news team to do this follow up report. The report revealed that the did not know the state trooper and had apparently followed the trooper's boyfriend home from a bar. The boyfriend did not know the woman but did call the police to say she was passed out in her car in the trooper's driveway.  When police arrived at the scene, the woman's car was running. Perhaps because she was unaware of Mr. Redlich's advice, the woman allegedly told the police that her home address was "28780 I'm drunk."

Unfortunately for the woman, Clark's Grove, Minnesota-the town where the woman lives-does not have a street called "I'm Drunk."  A quick google search of the woman's name reveals that she did get the numeric portion of her address right.  However, being half-right about her address was not enough to prevent the woman from being charged with driving while intoxicated.

I don't know that there are any lessons to be drawn from these two stories besides the one should not drink and drive. I did find it amusing that there at the southern tip of the country there is a story about how to avoid being charged with drunk driving while at the the northern tip of the country there is a story about how to not avoid being charged with drunk driving.

You've spent time in both states Mr. Torvik, do these tales tell us anything about the advantages or disadvantages of living in Minnesota or Florida?

Distracted driving -- or mountains out of molehills?

2010 was another record year.  I guess they're all record years in one way or another.  Sort of like how, according to my daughter: "You are my best ... my best dad."  I've got that going for me.

But 2010 was a record year in a good way:  it was safest year ever to be driving a car.  Total traffic fatalities were 32,788 -- the lowest raw number since 1949.  Per mile, there is no comparison:  in 1949 there were over 7 deaths per 100 million miles traveled; in 2010 there was just over 1.

So we've come a long way.  But I have a question:  how can we be making such improvements in road safety at the same time we are facing the growing menace of cell phone use and texting while driving?  We have all read about how talking on a cell phone -- even hands-free -- is the equivalent to driving with a BAC of .08 ("the legal limit").  And we have all sat at a stop light and watched driver after driver motor by while talking on a cell phone.  And yet ... the objective stats show that it gets safer and safer to drive.

Much safer.  Accident rates and traffic deaths are not just on a steep long-term decline -- they're on a steep short-term decline.  In 1994, the number fatalities per 100 million miles driven was 1.73.  In 2010 the number was 1.09.  By my lawyer-math, that's a 37% decline in just 17 years -- 17 years that happen to coincide with the invention and mass proliferation of cell phones.  And it's not just fatalities and injuries that are going down -- overall crashes are way down too.  According to this government publication (see Table 2-17, page 153) "crashes" per 100 million miles driven fell 28% -- from 276 in 1994 to 198 in 2006 (latest data available). In raw numbers, crashes fell from about 6.5 million in 1994 to just under 6 million in 2006, despite many more miles driven.  (This data also includes motorcycles, cyclists, and pedestrians, I think.) 

Surely cars and roads are getting safer.  But if cell phones and texting were really such a menace, I would expect that the safety numbers would just tread water.  Instead, we continue to get safer and safer on the road, even as the crisis of "distracted driving" spreads like a cancer across the land.      

I just bought an iPhone yesterday.  Literally yesterday -- that's how far behind the times I am.  I don't have a texting plan.  I actually pull over to talk on the cell phone (sometimes).  So this isn't a personal thing.  It's a contrarian thing.  I wonder if the concern over "distracted driving" isn't just hysteria.  And even if distracted driving is a problem, I wonder if it's a problem we can handle.  After all, cell phone use in a car is productive.  The very fact that we have tolerated losing tens of thousands of lives on the roadways every year for decades shows that we are willing to trade human life for increased efficiency and productivity.  The only question is how much productivity and efficiency we need to justify this loss of life.  Ultimately, even if cell phone use in cars makes driving more dangerous, maybe we can afford the risk, since driving while using them is still safer than driving has ever been before.