Thursday, May 8, 2008
Anitated Bibleography
Balko, Radley. “Eliminating Drunk Driving Creates Repressive Laws.” At Issue: Alcohol Abuse.Ed. Ronnie D. Lankford. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2007. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Gale. Boston Public Library. Boston MA. 1 April. 2008
Radley Balko is a news reporter from Fox News, and was an analyst at the Cato Institute. He believes that drinking and driving should be illegal, but he also thinks that the drunken limits should be heightened. For example, he thinks the alcohol blood level should be higher, and the punishment should not be so large. He argues that MADD goes too far with their drunk driving limits. They lowered the alcohol blood level to .08 percent to be to drunk to drive. The writer says “The stricter laws increase enforcement costs with no discernible benefit.” This means that some of the laws cost a lot of money, but the effects of them are sometimes not noticeable.
This article is very useful; it showed why someone would disagree with MADD. This is not bias. It tells both of the points, harshly punishing drunk drivers, and lowering the limit of being drunk with lower punishments. One part of the article said “Some of those laws were reasonable of course- increasing fines for repeat offenders, for example.” This quote shows that it is not bias. This is useful because it has information for both sides of the argument. Some of Balko’s views are good, but drinking and driving is still bad, and dangerous, so it would make sense to give harsh punishments to repeat offenders.
Radley Balko is a news reporter from Fox News, and was an analyst at the Cato Institute. He believes that drinking and driving should be illegal, but he also thinks that the drunken limits should be heightened. For example, he thinks the alcohol blood level should be higher, and the punishment should not be so large. He argues that MADD goes too far with their drunk driving limits. They lowered the alcohol blood level to .08 percent to be to drunk to drive. The writer says “The stricter laws increase enforcement costs with no discernible benefit.” This means that some of the laws cost a lot of money, but the effects of them are sometimes not noticeable.
This article is very useful; it showed why someone would disagree with MADD. This is not bias. It tells both of the points, harshly punishing drunk drivers, and lowering the limit of being drunk with lower punishments. One part of the article said “Some of those laws were reasonable of course- increasing fines for repeat offenders, for example.” This quote shows that it is not bias. This is useful because it has information for both sides of the argument. Some of Balko’s views are good, but drinking and driving is still bad, and dangerous, so it would make sense to give harsh punishments to repeat offenders.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)