MADD just couldn't resist...and neiher could I
A while back I have a post about how much MADD pisses me off. Their constant bombardment of donation requests and phone calls have gone far beyond my expectations. MADD is worse than an ex who just doesn't understand the word "no" and thinks that being ignored just means you want them around twice as much.
I tired to ignore them but they couldn't help but send me another invoice, marked as if it is past due, and they are wondering where my second donation is. They even tried to bend for me a little by informaing me that as much as they would appreciate the $147 donation, they would be ok with a $37 donation. I never liked being ignored either, so instead of trying to avoid MADD, I have sank to their level and decided to send them a little letter of my own. I hope they get the picture this time:
Dear MADD,
I do not wish to donate to your “Annual Fund Drive” or any of your other vague “Drives” that never explain exactly what action is being taken and why you need so much money to ask legislation to change their laws. I do not wish to give my support to an organization that has made NO progress in the past year. I do not wish to donate to a law being changed that will cause taxes to be raised to pay for the devices you would like to make “mandatory”. In fact, I would greatly appreciate your reimbursement of the original donation I have made as I have recently witnessed a person who caused an accident because they were drinking and driving yet did not get a ticket for the DUI let alone a mandatory ignition interlock.
As wonderful as the ignition interlock device sounds, it still would not prevent driving under the influence. The device does not send a signal to the authorities and give the plate number of the driver to which the authorities could seek out the offender and take them in. The device simply keeps a record that may not be checked for 30 days and in some cases up to 90 days. The driver has at least an entire month to keep drinking and driving. This is not to mention that an ignition interlock device would only be put on a vehicle AFTER an incident has already occurred, or that someone else could blow into the device once it is placed in a vehicle, regardless of how many times it may need to be blown into. The ignition interlock would also not be able to detect a person under the influence of marijuana, cocaine, heroin, prescribed medication, and any other drug that would also impair a person’s ability to drive a vehicle.
Keep the original donation as my gift to you for suckering me into donating in the first place with your bologna sob stories. Please take me off your call and mailing list as the information you have for me is my work environment and it is extremely unprofessional to be spammed at work when all I thought I was doing was being nice by making the initial donation without questioning why I was sending it at all. I suggest you gear your organization toward the education of the importance of safe driving to people of all ages, but specifically the younger generations. Start at the root of the problem, not after the problem has occurred. Prevent these situations at all through education at an early age rather than try to prevent something that has already happened. Start a program with the local department of transportation instead of trying to change laws.
Good luck.
Sarah M
