Buzzed Driving?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfVJ0CNVnMM

Buzzed driving is Drunk driving is the ad counsel's new attempt to stem the scourge of impaired driving. Now, I don't know if this is just in California or throughout the country but, it literaly, figurativly, spiritually and emotionally makes zero sense!

I want to start this however by saying that Drunk driving is not ok. If you are over the legal limit: get a cab, call a friend or meet someone to go home with. DON'T DRIVE DRUNK. It is dangerous and has been the cause of unimaginable tragedy.

Now point of clarification: Buzzed driving is not drunk driving. Buzzed driving is buzzed driving and drunk driving is drunk driving. Am I the only one that sees the utter lunacy that is involved in thsi campaign? When someone is above the legal limit and driving, they are driving drunk period. When someone is not above that legal limit and is "buzzed" they are not drunk driving pure and simple. This ad is nothing more than a continuance of the fear principal, that is to say they want you to be afraid that maybe, even if you have had just one, than you are to buzzed to drive. They want you to be afraid of seeing those flashing lights in your rearview even if you aren't drunk!! This idea seems to come down to a couple of principals:

First: This ad seems to give cops the further power to decide whether or not someone is buzzed or drunk and should be taken in for prosecution. As if Cops don't have enough power to instill fear in the people they are susposed to protect, now they can say "well you aren't drunk driving, but you are buzzed driving so we'll have to ruin your life with a DUI". Even further with a DUI Cops have the ability to literally RUIN your life. Driving a mile and a half after a night at your favorite bar is almost on par with commiting a robbery or rape. Some how our society has managed to put people who drive drunk in the same area as hardened criminals. Am I the only one that finds this insane? It's clear that innocent people do suffer from someones decision to drive drunk, but the intent is never on purpose right? A Drunk dude does not get in his car with the intent to run someone down does he? From what I know I would say its an accident...

Second: Let me make this clear saying buzzed driving is drunk drving is completely illogical. One of the eaisist proofs in logic if A is not B then B is not A or (~A --> ~B) and (~B-->~A). If we plug our words in it reads if being drunk is not being buzzed than being buzzed is not being drunk. Therefore Drunk is not Buzzed and Buzzed is not Drunk. and Buzzed driving is not drunk driving. This ad attempts to take one thing and say it is another. That is just not true! You cannot claim that a cat is a dog or a dog is a cat, they just are not the same thing. Logic, for some reason, is simply beyond the ad counsel and they could care less whether what they say makes sense as long as they illicit an emotional reaction.

I guess that is where I have the problem, the fact that instead of trying to inform and state truth, they try to instill fear and emotional responses. Let's just try and terrify people into doing what we want...