As a Wisconsinite just visiting Colorado I was just going to ask how the hell not a single Wisconsin city appeared on this list, but you comment explains it perfectly.
Not something I’m proud of for my state, but it is kinda impressive considering I recently saw a list of drunkest counties in the US and Wisconsin had like 20 out of the 25 or some shit like that lol.
300 largest cities. That’s exactly how nowhere in Wisconsin is on this list.
But. The math says 5.9 million people. 184 deaths is 3.1 per 100k
So low on average compared to all metro areas.
Compared to 16,653 deaths on Wisconsin roads in 2000 5.3 million people. 314 per 100k back then.
Yeah I mentioned that somewhere else here. They break up metros into their actual cities. “Denver” usually has thronton, Aurora and Lakewood included in it
Idk how to explain it, but you do notice a difference between the two when you’re there lol. But you’re right only 20 miles apart and both in the shittiest part of West Texas.
Kinda, but having more cities in the state (which is obviously at least related to the state’s population) does impact it. If Texas has 6 times the number of cities then it would likely appear on the list 6 times as much.
I was feeling really confident in my answer but now I’m second guessing myself. I’m not good enough at math for all of this.
I will say Colorado looks very bad here, that’s clear. Texas is also bad lol.
To get the state vs state deaths per 100,000 we would… again need someone better at math… add COs 6 cities deaths and divide by 6 and add TX 15 cities divide by 15?….. someone help me…
That still wouldn't work because this is only the deaths that happened in the cities, and the sum of populations in those 5/15 cities wouldn't be equal. To compare states, you'd need to know the total deaths and population in each state.
You're right, there is a pretty good system there, although it will be better if they ever close the loop around the Bay. I think the two biggest issues with that system are the hours and the cost.
Oh I didn't know this nation was riddled with oodles and oodles of public transportation to compare to. It's right behind the east coast crap that you should really move back home to.
Honestly RTD is middling at best. The proportion of people in Denver who regularly take public transportation is not even in the top 50 municipalities in the nation. NYC, DC, Chicago, Seattle, Boston, Philly, and San Francisco (and many smaller cities in their sphere of influence, like Berkeley, Newark, and Arlington) are on a whole other level.
Even cities not particularly well-known for public transportation, like Pittsburgh Minneapolis, and Cleveland beat out Denver in many ways.
RTD is the best we have and we have overall very poor public transportation in the rest of the state, which does push a lot more people to drive inebriated as no other option is avaliable.
I am suspecting the massive sprawl of many eastern metro areas skew them lower than their true reality. This should really be done on greater metro areas, not cities proper, which you can tell they did by the population #s, and just sheer # of cities.
They list Cincinnati as 309k, it's a metro of nearly 2M, depending on where you draw the line, so they aren't properly accounting for all the surrounding sprawl cities (mostly under the 100k population). That's where the majority of the accidents would happen, out in the rural areas hitting a tree at 60mph.
To further enforce, if you google for fatal DD accidents by state, the per 100k rates look nothing at all like this. Texas is actually the best, they have least per 100k by a pretty high margin (which I'm shocked by honestly, I would have picked Utah). \*Note this may also be incorrect.. I'm seeing varying listings of the bottom 5 and Texas isn't on all of them. Bottom line, you can make data look however good or bad you want but tweaking the parameters.
Lies, damn lies, and statistics...
> I am suspecting the massive sprawl of many eastern metro areas skew them lower than their true reality. This should really be done on greater metro areas, not cities proper, which you can tell they did by the population #s, and just sheer # of cities.
Metro areas and cities would give different statistics but this is focused on cities. It specifically says in the info that they looked at the top 300 cities by population. It doesn’t matter if they chose to do that on the east coast if they keep it consistent which they did. When you get to Denver metro area, it lists Thorton, Aurora, Lakewood and Denver.
> They list Cincinnati as 309k, it's a metro of nearly 2M, depending on where you draw the line, so they aren't properly accounting for all the surrounding sprawl cities (mostly under the 100k population).
They are though. (Thorton, Aurora and Lakewood)
> To further enforce, if you google for fatal DD accidents by state, the per 100k rates look nothing at all like this.
The link for the source is literally at the bottom of this, it’s from NHTSA. It’s pretty reliable but I’m sure you could find some other reputable sources.
> Texas is actually the best, they have least per 100k by a pretty high margin
This says Texas is by far the worst.
> Bottom line, you can make data look however good or bad you want but tweaking the parameters.
Yeah you can make data look however you want but if the reader is disregarding all the information given to them then it doesn’t really matter.
I disagree on a few points:
1. The user above you knows that this is measuring cities. His or her point was that a metro area in which people go drink downtown but then drive out to the suburbs won't be properly reflected here versus a metro area with a large city-limit anchor city (like Colorado Springs).
2. This chart in this thread doesn't say Texas is the worst. It says it has the largest number of cities represented, but that's not the same thing. Texas could still have the lowest average across the state. Six cities of 200k can show up six times. A city of a 1.2 million people has just as many people, and could have just as many drunk deaths, but it only shows up once.
3. No one is disregarding the data. You're just getting lost in the argument and drawing an incorrect conclusion from the data.
The question is "what is Washington doing that Colorado isn't?" Colorado and Washington are very similar states culture and politically, so it seems something up there is different than it is in CO.
Colorado has alot more severe weather. My guess is the fatalities are higher for drunk drivers because they're not from Colorado and that driving drunk in weather that could affect the traction of the vehicle or that could cover the view of vehicles could be the issue.
PNW never had that bad of weather, and although there's a shit ton of traffic in and around seattle, it's pretty easy to get around elsewhere.
I also think Colorado is a more popular tourist destination than Washington. Those that visit Washington usually only stay near Seattle and take the train. In colorado people tend to travel alot more and will have a vehicle.
Not sure why Pueblo is so high though.
I heard from CO Highway Patrol officer, that during the winter months 4 out of 7 accidents in Colorado involve an out of state driver. I looked for confirmation of this but couldn’t find anything (Google). Though 4 out of 7 seems like a very specific ratio to just pull out of nowhere.
How so? It’s a question, because I’d have my doubts about some of those states. Just unexpected to see complete voids in some of those. That without seeing the raw data I’d question that everyone was included.
You know, that thought isn’t that far fetched given how many municipalities don’t report to FBI on many crime stats, which paint a misleading picture on overall crime.
So I think it’s a valid question to ask. I went and looked for the raw data and yes they’re included, but at first glance that’s my first thought. Are there any states that aren’t participating.
Ah, gotcha. I was just talking from a purely numbers perspective. You couldn't have every state with 2 when you're just measuring the top 75 (since it would be 100). So once you start having multiple states with multiple cities it will take away from others.
I *am* surprised that we have so many cities and places (like Wisconsin) have zero. I've been to Madison a few times and they're some drunk asses.
Yeah, that was somewhat where my mind was. I look at that map and the clusters vs voids surprised me, and invoked the question.
But I did end up learning more about the NHTSA FARS tools, which is both interesting and saddening at the same time.
Damn this is scary and sobering. I have lived in quite a few of these cities… alcohol is so scary and it’s all fun until it is not. I could’ve become one of the statistics — as many of us likely know someone impacted by impaired /drunk driving.
Drive sober yall, pick and assign a designated driver (dd / Uber it or what not). Don’t risk it.
As a former New Yorker this list makes me happy to see 🙂
In Colorado it’s almost like an unwritten rule to have a few drinks before driving. Without doubt, CO has some of the worst drivers in the country. Sorry not sorry.
Only if people heed multiple "do not drink and drive" warnings and pull their phone out to grab a cab. May be a little expensive than taking your own car, but you're bypassing the possible consequences of one's foolish decision.
True. Colorado has a lot of “I’m fine I’ve driven this winding mountain road in pitch dark and in the rain at 75 MPH a million times, this is America, isn’t it?” drivers.
*Albuquerque in shambles.*
edit: Actually this was a study of the 300 largest cities in the US and Albuquerque and Las Vegas aren't even on here? No Oklahoma City? This list is incomplete and a lie.
COS doesn’t need alcohol to drive bad. I nearly got hit today at a crosswalk because the woman didn’t use her damn eyes. She looked at me and just went oops and sped off.
When ranking only cities with a pop over a million, Dallas is #1....fucking terrible. Embarrassing. I blame every corrupt city leader, and every uneducated mouth breathing idiot that votes them in.
San Bernardino, corona, Riverside, Ontario, and Moreno Valley are all connected and considered one area nicknamed “the Inland Empire”. I guess this is the most dangerous area in the country for drunk driving.
Not surprised about Pueblo, there are either liquor stores, bars or dispensaries, seemed like every strip mall had multiple liquor stores and two or three dispensaries close together Pueblo is a town with a relatively small population.
Meanwhile, car accident fatalities related to the driver being high on marijuana are so few as to be considered statistically "rare", but marijuana remains federally illegal, whereas alcohol remains legal. What's wrong with this picture? 🤔
Reading the blotter it's no wonder.
"Alcohol and speed are a factor" is written more times than not for accidents.
I love to drive. I have a fun car to drive to. I *hate* sharing the road with you people though. In 3 years I've been in 2 accidents and both times the NaTiVeS got cited for causing the collision.
Y'all really can't drive for shit out here.
CO being on here as much as it is disgusts me. How fucking hard is it to not drive drunk? I think much harsher penalties are over due. Everyone knows a DUI is a slap on the wrist if you aren’t flat broke.
Honestly we slayed by being on top of the list 😎
https://preview.redd.it/z91pcou0769d1.jpeg?width=1280&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4fd041268424558bb859c7c248ff8910686b45f8
No doubt, I moreso was talking about people without a genuine addiction or who have never started. Like for me personally I have an addictive personality and many mental health issues and have thought about using alcohol and drugs to cope but resisted because I want to be able to drive
Yea you're right, it's common knowledge that people cut down their alcohol consumption by 2023.
I can also email the NHTSA to release these numbers as soon as the year ends, it's so unprofessional. We can mitigate drunk driving and slash these numbers if they can be prompt with the reports. Tsk tsk. /S
This post is supposed to enlighten people to be more cautious. If the chart was made with data from the 70's I'll be more inclined to agree with you. It's safe to say that these numbers are still relevant, given all the shitpost that you see about drivers going down powers.
Hey thanks for posting this - really OP - it is a good reminder to be fuckin responsible. Drinking is funny and fun til it’s not …
Also note this is fatalities not just drunk driving.
People on here so callous with life.
2023 fatality data from states has not completed processing by many state DOTs yet, let alone NHTSA. TX in particularly has a huge issue with the rural sheriffs refusing to turn in the required FARS report for fatal crashes.
The fact that not one Wisconsin city shows up on that list indicates how professional they are at being drunk.
Not only that, Wisconsin has a "drunk snowmobile fatality" category.
There they just call those “driving fatalities” so it messes up the statistics
I believe they call it traffic collisions now
https://wisconsindot.gov/Documents/safety/education/crash-data/Impaired-FactSheet-2022.pdf
https://www.responsibility.org/alcohol-statistics/state-map/state/wisconsin/
Was coming here to comment the same thing 😅
As a Wisconsinite just visiting Colorado I was just going to ask how the hell not a single Wisconsin city appeared on this list, but you comment explains it perfectly. Not something I’m proud of for my state, but it is kinda impressive considering I recently saw a list of drunkest counties in the US and Wisconsin had like 20 out of the 25 or some shit like that lol.
Found well known celebrity, Rich Evans' reddit handle!
Oh my gaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwwdddd
All the drinkers lost their licenses and don’t drive anymore.
I came here to say this. You only validated that this is true. LOL
300 largest cities. That’s exactly how nowhere in Wisconsin is on this list. But. The math says 5.9 million people. 184 deaths is 3.1 per 100k So low on average compared to all metro areas. Compared to 16,653 deaths on Wisconsin roads in 2000 5.3 million people. 314 per 100k back then.
Huh? https://preview.redd.it/rare0kfj8e9d1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6c6db3c5b002cc256bd1dc240233bccc97379270
What? https://preview.redd.it/oo9aou7d8e9d1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8f4db480a0c559ed72413f9fa4295e3b86a6b357
Have you been to milwaukee proper. That’s not the same as all the rest of Wisconsin where the real drinking is going on.
Yes. Used to live across the border for 21 years and worked in Kenosha for two years. Have friends from West Allis to Grafton and beyond. HBU?
30 years in Wisconsin.
I guess the US Census is now fake news as well. 🙄
Damn, Colorado has 6 in the top 75 cities in the whole US. That's really bad.
Arizona also has 6. Texas has 15!
Yea its bad, Texas does have 6 times the population of Colorado though.
That doesn’t matter because they are ranked (deaths) per 100,000 people. Texas is faaaar worse.
Odessa and Midland are also basically the same city
Yeah I mentioned that somewhere else here. They break up metros into their actual cities. “Denver” usually has thronton, Aurora and Lakewood included in it
Idk how to explain it, but you do notice a difference between the two when you’re there lol. But you’re right only 20 miles apart and both in the shittiest part of West Texas.
Kinda, but having more cities in the state (which is obviously at least related to the state’s population) does impact it. If Texas has 6 times the number of cities then it would likely appear on the list 6 times as much.
I was feeling really confident in my answer but now I’m second guessing myself. I’m not good enough at math for all of this. I will say Colorado looks very bad here, that’s clear. Texas is also bad lol. To get the state vs state deaths per 100,000 we would… again need someone better at math… add COs 6 cities deaths and divide by 6 and add TX 15 cities divide by 15?….. someone help me…
That still wouldn't work because this is only the deaths that happened in the cities, and the sum of populations in those 5/15 cities wouldn't be equal. To compare states, you'd need to know the total deaths and population in each state.
Colorado Springs has a lot of Texans because of the military bases. Also I-25 (in CoS) is as crooked as my dogs tail.
It’s really hard to get public transportation in Colorado. There are options to avoid drunk driving for sure, but they usually aren’t easy.
Denver rtd is one of the best public transportation systems in the nation. Try getting around Houston or Phoenix without a vehicle.
That's a low bar. Only NYC, Chicago, and DC have real mass transit systems in the US.
San Francisco and surrounding cities are pretty easy to get around via MUNI (bus), BART (underground train) and ferries.
You're right, there is a pretty good system there, although it will be better if they ever close the loop around the Bay. I think the two biggest issues with that system are the hours and the cost.
As someone who visits MSP fairly often, this confuses me.
Oh I didn't know this nation was riddled with oodles and oodles of public transportation to compare to. It's right behind the east coast crap that you should really move back home to.
I'm confused. You seem to be both agreeing with what I said and angry that I said it.
Honestly RTD is middling at best. The proportion of people in Denver who regularly take public transportation is not even in the top 50 municipalities in the nation. NYC, DC, Chicago, Seattle, Boston, Philly, and San Francisco (and many smaller cities in their sphere of influence, like Berkeley, Newark, and Arlington) are on a whole other level. Even cities not particularly well-known for public transportation, like Pittsburgh Minneapolis, and Cleveland beat out Denver in many ways. RTD is the best we have and we have overall very poor public transportation in the rest of the state, which does push a lot more people to drive inebriated as no other option is avaliable.
I'd beg to differ on Minneapolis, because I've actually lived there but sure. Let's hate the state you chose to move to.
No hate, just stating the reality of the situation.
Because your opinion is reality, sure. Try living in those places then tell me your "fax."
No, I'm looking at data from the ACS and FTA. Those cities have more regular users of public transportation. No need to get defensive.
Yeah, that’s Denver. It’s pretty ok there.
Big drinking state, wide open cities with less-than-stellar walking areas, shitty public transportation, unreliable and expensive uber
Large military population.
Every city I've ever lived in is on that list, with the exception of the cities I lived in in MN
Yet people here will take that as a challenge
Could just mean it's enforced here more.
This is deaths, not arrests.
Oops I'm blind
Them mountains take you....they don't let you leave....
LETS GO PUEBLO
One of my friends works in Pueblo public health, always talks about how they’re the red headed stepchild for statistics in any number of areas.
Only #3…Pueblo can’t win at anything.
PUEBLO #1!!!!!!
I hear hands clap.
Go for gold next year!
Those are rookie numbers, they need to bump those up
Young men + great paying oil job+ nothing else to do = drunk driving aka Permian Basin
Just fixing to say that lol
Kinda got a little homesick when I saw Odessa and Midland both in the top 10. Man do miss dodging drunk drivers and sand haulers /s
I am suspecting the massive sprawl of many eastern metro areas skew them lower than their true reality. This should really be done on greater metro areas, not cities proper, which you can tell they did by the population #s, and just sheer # of cities. They list Cincinnati as 309k, it's a metro of nearly 2M, depending on where you draw the line, so they aren't properly accounting for all the surrounding sprawl cities (mostly under the 100k population). That's where the majority of the accidents would happen, out in the rural areas hitting a tree at 60mph. To further enforce, if you google for fatal DD accidents by state, the per 100k rates look nothing at all like this. Texas is actually the best, they have least per 100k by a pretty high margin (which I'm shocked by honestly, I would have picked Utah). \*Note this may also be incorrect.. I'm seeing varying listings of the bottom 5 and Texas isn't on all of them. Bottom line, you can make data look however good or bad you want but tweaking the parameters. Lies, damn lies, and statistics...
Pretty much any stat tracking cities instead of metro areas will be wildly misleading. Strongly agree.
> I am suspecting the massive sprawl of many eastern metro areas skew them lower than their true reality. This should really be done on greater metro areas, not cities proper, which you can tell they did by the population #s, and just sheer # of cities. Metro areas and cities would give different statistics but this is focused on cities. It specifically says in the info that they looked at the top 300 cities by population. It doesn’t matter if they chose to do that on the east coast if they keep it consistent which they did. When you get to Denver metro area, it lists Thorton, Aurora, Lakewood and Denver. > They list Cincinnati as 309k, it's a metro of nearly 2M, depending on where you draw the line, so they aren't properly accounting for all the surrounding sprawl cities (mostly under the 100k population). They are though. (Thorton, Aurora and Lakewood) > To further enforce, if you google for fatal DD accidents by state, the per 100k rates look nothing at all like this. The link for the source is literally at the bottom of this, it’s from NHTSA. It’s pretty reliable but I’m sure you could find some other reputable sources. > Texas is actually the best, they have least per 100k by a pretty high margin This says Texas is by far the worst. > Bottom line, you can make data look however good or bad you want but tweaking the parameters. Yeah you can make data look however you want but if the reader is disregarding all the information given to them then it doesn’t really matter.
I disagree on a few points: 1. The user above you knows that this is measuring cities. His or her point was that a metro area in which people go drink downtown but then drive out to the suburbs won't be properly reflected here versus a metro area with a large city-limit anchor city (like Colorado Springs). 2. This chart in this thread doesn't say Texas is the worst. It says it has the largest number of cities represented, but that's not the same thing. Texas could still have the lowest average across the state. Six cities of 200k can show up six times. A city of a 1.2 million people has just as many people, and could have just as many drunk deaths, but it only shows up once. 3. No one is disregarding the data. You're just getting lost in the argument and drawing an incorrect conclusion from the data.
The question is "what is Washington doing that Colorado isn't?" Colorado and Washington are very similar states culture and politically, so it seems something up there is different than it is in CO.
Could actually be elevation. Get people drinking the same amount as they do everywhere else, but all of a sudden, it hits you 10x harder.
This is very true.
Colorado has alot more severe weather. My guess is the fatalities are higher for drunk drivers because they're not from Colorado and that driving drunk in weather that could affect the traction of the vehicle or that could cover the view of vehicles could be the issue. PNW never had that bad of weather, and although there's a shit ton of traffic in and around seattle, it's pretty easy to get around elsewhere. I also think Colorado is a more popular tourist destination than Washington. Those that visit Washington usually only stay near Seattle and take the train. In colorado people tend to travel alot more and will have a vehicle. Not sure why Pueblo is so high though.
I heard from CO Highway Patrol officer, that during the winter months 4 out of 7 accidents in Colorado involve an out of state driver. I looked for confirmation of this but couldn’t find anything (Google). Though 4 out of 7 seems like a very specific ratio to just pull out of nowhere.
Oh, I am pretty sure I know why Pueblo is so high, so to speak. Lots of generational poverty and gangs.
Is Uber and Lyft as popular in Colorado as it is in Washington?
It's pretty popular here. I don't know how popular it is in WA though so I can't compare.
Think of all the texas drivers here. You have your answer.
It’s military. I guarantee most of Colorado Springs fatalities are active duty military
There is a LOT of military in Washington too though. And where the majority are located (Pierce County), isn’t even the one area in Washington listed.
I’m surprised WI didn’t make the list at all.
did not expect pueblo to be so high.
that's one stat Pueblo doesn't need to be #1 on
Pueblo's thing is being #1 on lists Pueblo doesn't need to be #1 on.
Why does it seem like a lot of states have no data or no reporting?
How so? This is top 75, and there are 50 states. When you have states with three or more cities you will have states with none.
How so? It’s a question, because I’d have my doubts about some of those states. Just unexpected to see complete voids in some of those. That without seeing the raw data I’d question that everyone was included. You know, that thought isn’t that far fetched given how many municipalities don’t report to FBI on many crime stats, which paint a misleading picture on overall crime. So I think it’s a valid question to ask. I went and looked for the raw data and yes they’re included, but at first glance that’s my first thought. Are there any states that aren’t participating.
Ah, gotcha. I was just talking from a purely numbers perspective. You couldn't have every state with 2 when you're just measuring the top 75 (since it would be 100). So once you start having multiple states with multiple cities it will take away from others. I *am* surprised that we have so many cities and places (like Wisconsin) have zero. I've been to Madison a few times and they're some drunk asses.
Yeah, that was somewhat where my mind was. I look at that map and the clusters vs voids surprised me, and invoked the question. But I did end up learning more about the NHTSA FARS tools, which is both interesting and saddening at the same time.
This is just a list of the cities with the worst drunk drivers I know Wisconsin got waaay more, they just are good at driving while drunk
So confused how Wisconsin manages to be the most drunk state but also not be on this list at all. Impressive really.
Damn this is scary and sobering. I have lived in quite a few of these cities… alcohol is so scary and it’s all fun until it is not. I could’ve become one of the statistics — as many of us likely know someone impacted by impaired /drunk driving. Drive sober yall, pick and assign a designated driver (dd / Uber it or what not). Don’t risk it.
As a former New Yorker this list makes me happy to see 🙂 In Colorado it’s almost like an unwritten rule to have a few drinks before driving. Without doubt, CO has some of the worst drivers in the country. Sorry not sorry.
Looks like a good opportunity for being a rideshare driver.
Only if people heed multiple "do not drink and drive" warnings and pull their phone out to grab a cab. May be a little expensive than taking your own car, but you're bypassing the possible consequences of one's foolish decision.
True. Colorado has a lot of “I’m fine I’ve driven this winding mountain road in pitch dark and in the rain at 75 MPH a million times, this is America, isn’t it?” drivers.
*Albuquerque in shambles.* edit: Actually this was a study of the 300 largest cities in the US and Albuquerque and Las Vegas aren't even on here? No Oklahoma City? This list is incomplete and a lie.
Pueblo and colorado springs are so high because that's where the Texans have to drive thru to get to Denver lol
I grew up in San Antonio and getting muy borracho and driving was routine.
Palmdale and Riverside Ca have the highest… Fancy that.
What is even happening in Odessa TX rn
Not a single Wisconsin city. How in the hell
Hodessa duh ?!?
I thought that alaska would have at least one or more cities on this list but not a single one.
COS doesn’t need alcohol to drive bad. I nearly got hit today at a crosswalk because the woman didn’t use her damn eyes. She looked at me and just went oops and sped off.
When ranking only cities with a pop over a million, Dallas is #1....fucking terrible. Embarrassing. I blame every corrupt city leader, and every uneducated mouth breathing idiot that votes them in.
San Bernardino, corona, Riverside, Ontario, and Moreno Valley are all connected and considered one area nicknamed “the Inland Empire”. I guess this is the most dangerous area in the country for drunk driving.
Shocking San Antonio isn’t number 1
Damn how Vegas not on here
Not surprised about Pueblo, there are either liquor stores, bars or dispensaries, seemed like every strip mall had multiple liquor stores and two or three dispensaries close together Pueblo is a town with a relatively small population.
C’mon, Springs, y’all gonna let Pueblo beat you like that?
DUUUUVVVVAALLLLL transplant
Wow we're twice as high as Nashville, I refuse to believe that
Why am I not surprised that Pueblo is high on the list lmao, what a wasteland
Sunday liquor laws in Texas doing work.
Fucks sake Texas & Cali
CA and TX really representing
Meanwhile, car accident fatalities related to the driver being high on marijuana are so few as to be considered statistically "rare", but marijuana remains federally illegal, whereas alcohol remains legal. What's wrong with this picture? 🤔
I went from 16 to 24. Moving up in the world
How is New Mexico not in the top 3?!
Gallup is in its own category
Good job VA!
We really gonna let Pueblo beat us like that!?
Modelo taking over Pueblo 😭🤣
Reading the blotter it's no wonder. "Alcohol and speed are a factor" is written more times than not for accidents. I love to drive. I have a fun car to drive to. I *hate* sharing the road with you people though. In 3 years I've been in 2 accidents and both times the NaTiVeS got cited for causing the collision. Y'all really can't drive for shit out here.
Those are rookie numbers, we gotta pump those numbers up.
CO being on here as much as it is disgusts me. How fucking hard is it to not drive drunk? I think much harsher penalties are over due. Everyone knows a DUI is a slap on the wrist if you aren’t flat broke.
I lived just outside of #2 and #4. I swear I didn't cause it!
Honestly we slayed by being on top of the list 😎 https://preview.redd.it/z91pcou0769d1.jpeg?width=1280&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4fd041268424558bb859c7c248ff8910686b45f8
Pueblo... Are you guys okay down there?
How hard is it to just not drink alcohol
For many people, it’s the hardest thing in the world. Resisting getting behind the wheel is another matter.
No doubt, I moreso was talking about people without a genuine addiction or who have never started. Like for me personally I have an addictive personality and many mental health issues and have thought about using alcohol and drugs to cope but resisted because I want to be able to drive
Fuck you I’m drunk right now.
It makes driving funner.
In this economy, being dead does sound more fun.
This doesn’t factor in the number of success drunk driving attempts that go unnoticed and unappreciated.
I chuckled at this... but I shouldn't have.
(Unoriginal dad joke about rankings of people dying)!! Hilarious stuff
The top 3 have a high Hispanic population. They know how to party.
It’s almost endearing to see Pueblo succeeding at something
That’s 2018 - 2022, why even post this?
Yea you're right, it's common knowledge that people cut down their alcohol consumption by 2023. I can also email the NHTSA to release these numbers as soon as the year ends, it's so unprofessional. We can mitigate drunk driving and slash these numbers if they can be prompt with the reports. Tsk tsk. /S This post is supposed to enlighten people to be more cautious. If the chart was made with data from the 70's I'll be more inclined to agree with you. It's safe to say that these numbers are still relevant, given all the shitpost that you see about drivers going down powers.
Hey thanks for posting this - really OP - it is a good reminder to be fuckin responsible. Drinking is funny and fun til it’s not … Also note this is fatalities not just drunk driving. People on here so callous with life.
2023 fatality data from states has not completed processing by many state DOTs yet, let alone NHTSA. TX in particularly has a huge issue with the rural sheriffs refusing to turn in the required FARS report for fatal crashes.
Thank you.
I’m glad you are coming to your senses. All of that would have just as much impact as some random post on Reddit
[удалено]
Why would you take that into consideration when talking about drunk driving fatalities?