According to the Mothers Against Drunk Driving (M.A.D.D.) when it comes to drunk driving, South Carolina has a lot of room for improvement. The data they collected with the help of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) indicates that the state has one of the highest numbers of DUI accidents resulting in fatalities than any other state in the country, and that it’s getting worse.
The data collected showed that in 2013, South Carolina had 335 deaths as a result of DUIs. This was a lower number than experienced in 2012, but it was high enough to put the state well above the national average of state traffic deaths caused by DUIs. The national average is approximately 31%, while South Carolina’s state average is 44%.
Steven Burritt, the program director of South Carolina’s M.A.D.D. program wants to see the number change and he feels state lawmakers aren’t working hard enough to instigate change. “Improvements aren’t being made fast enough, and it’s a shame that we lead the nation in such devastating circumstances. It forces us to ask ourselves as a state once again whether we’re doing everything we know we should to drive these numbers down. We know the answer is that we’re not.”
For several years, M.A.D.D. has been focusing large portion of its resources on the Campaign to Eliminate Drunk Driving, a campaign that outlines many ideas about how the number of DUI instances can decrease. The program supports ideas such as sobriety checkpoints, ignition interlock devices, and technological improvements such as Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety.
While lawmakers might not be moving as fast as M.A.D.D. would like, they are making an effort to change the DUI statistics for the better. Following the passing of “Emma’s Law” all first time offenders who were arrested with blood alcohol content that exceeds .12 will have ignition interlock devices installed on their vehicle. M.A.D.D. admits that it’s a step in the right direction, but it’s not enough.
Burritt said more needs to be done in South Carolina. “We look at the issue of ignition interlock devices, which we had a nice step forward with, with Emma’s Law and we were very proud and that was a major achievement. Yet compared to what some other states have done we really only went part of the way,” Burritt said in an interview tih the South Carolina Radio Network. “Emma’s Law is going to help with these numbers going forward, for sure. But we did not go as far as 24 states have done to require these devices for every DUI offender, so we can’t expect the kind of massive drops those states had. Also, Emma’s Law can only meet expectations if those who should be convicted of drunk driving actually are. We know this isn’t happening.”
South Carolina personal injury lawyer at Joe and Martin, Joseph Sandefur, applauds M.A.D.D.’s efforts. “I hope lawmaker pay close attention to the suggestions M.A.D.D. has made. The two main reasons I opted to pursue a career in personal injury law was because I wanted to help people and encourage the legal system to work to improve safety conditions for everyone the roads.”
If you have heard of WEN hair care products then you might be tempted to give it ia try. Before you do you might want to know that there have been a number of lawsuits filed against Guthy-Renker. This is the manufacturer of the WEN hair care products. The lawsuits have alleged that the line of products that the company produces has caused many of the users to lose their hair. There have actually been a number of lawsuits related to this company’s products. The claims are that Guthy-Renker did not tell the consumers about any risks, even when they were complaining about losing their hair.
The Daily Beast had reported in 2015 that 200 women throughout 40 states had filed different suits against the company. They had stated that they were suffering from hair loss, damage to their scalp and a number of other problems related to their hair care products. Even though this product is said to be sulfate free those that have filed the claims have reported that they developed different side effects a few weeks after using this products. One of the plaintiffs, Amy Friedman, said that she needed to take substantial vitamins, and it took weeks for her loss of hair to actually stop
“The hair loss is not de minimus – consumers who suffer hair loss often lose one quarter to one third of their hair, or more,” her lawsuit said. “As a result, beyond the cost of the Products, consumers are forced to undertake a variety of costly efforts to regain their hair and mask the ill effects of the Products.”
The company has stated that their product is not defective and does not cause any hair loss. Even though this does not have sulfate in it, it does have other ingredients that you can find in a number of other hair care products. There are a number of reasons that hair loss can take place. Therefore, those that file a suit against this company will have to prove that WEN caused the hair loss.
The plaintiffs are arguing that Guthy-Renker either knew about the risks. If they did not know, they should have known. They also report that the company kept the risks hidden and they took comments related to hair loss off of their Faceboook page.
The company actually filed a motion for the lawsuits to be dismissed. They said that the clients that filed the lawsuits had agreed to binding arbitration when they purchased the products online. The Judge had thrown out part of the motion but then denied part of it. The Judge stated that not all of the customers had the proper notice related to the arbitration.