Jeremy Garnett                                                               12/3/16

                                                       
                                                       Mothers Against Drunk Driving


For my final project and blog, i'm going to discuss the organization that was called Mothers Against Drunk Driving, and their tactics and how the audience they're targeting to prevent and put an end to drunk driving from happening in the near future. Mothers against Drunk Driving is an organization, that was established by a woman named (Candace Lightner), who's daughter (Cari Lightner) was killed in a vicious hit-and-run accident by a drunk driver named (Clarence Busch). Clarence was arrested and indicted for the total amount of twenty one months but on house arrest and not a prison. Candace then took action and formed an organization called Mothers Against Drunk Driving, whose goals were to reduce drunk driving traffic fatalities and the organization has been highly effective in raising public disapproval of drunk driving. Candace Lightners organization started to become so known worldwide that the Mother Against Drunk Driving organization started to branch in different cities and state, then eventually world wide in general. the organization mainly targeted those that possessed a vehicle and like to party, those who possess alcohol in general, and those who like to drink and driver, but everyone was targeted in general. Mothers Against Drunk Driving set up PR campaigns to educate adults, teens, and just anyone in general who is unaware of the effects that alcohol has on the human body and the harm that it could cause. Throughout the years from 1980 to 2000, studies have shown the decline in drunk driving accidents around the world at a gradual rate. Mothers Against Drunk Driving also contributed in lowering the blood alcohol count from 0.1 to no higher than the maximum amount of 0.08. Lastly, in the year of 1985, Candace Lightner had parted ways with Mothers Against Drunk Driving for having some disagreements, but in 1995,she had worked for a lobbying firm in Washington D.C., on behalf of the American Beverage Institute, where she helped contribute to establishing the new blood alcohol count.

Jeremy Garnett                                                             12/3/16

                                       Ethical Violation

I believe there is an ethical violation when it comes down to employment discrimination. First hand, discrimination is when one is being prejudice to another because of one's race, religion, ethnicity, or sex. The title VII of the civil right act of 1964 specifically states that 'an employer cannot discriminate against an employee for race, age, gender, and lastly sexuality'. There is still discrimination in workplaces today because of such reasons such as lack of training, and favoritism towards one group of people and leaving the others out of the equation. According to the equal employment opportunity commission, (http://oureverydaylife.com/reasons-discrimination-continues-exist-workplace-3054.html), in 2012 there have been over 99,000 discrimination claims filled. I find this as an ethical violation because people in workplaces still portray specific behaviors towards others, whether they are good behaviors such as over-congratulating one based on something minor they have done. Then you have the bad behaviors that one portrays to another, which are getting into a physical fight with an employee because they late to work. This violates ethical standards because in workplaces today, authority higher than part-time and full-time employees clearly take advantage and abuse those who they feel as though is inferior than those who they think seems more upper echelon. For example, a boss may tell one of his or her employees that they can go home early, but might let the other employee stay at work longer because even though that employer might not tell them the real reason, but in all honesty they might not like the way that employee gets more attention from people for his or her skin color or religion.This is offensive because in workplaces today, employers would punish employees that aren't even violating the jobs policies, and are following their objectives for the job. In my opinion, this is an indication of one's character because as it says in the title VII of the civil rights act of 1964, discriminating against race, gender, age, or religion is prohibited in a workplace. In jobs today, the employer is informed of their rights as being an employer but still there is discrimination in jobs mainly because of those reasons, mainly because the employer chose to ignore that policy and make choices based on their emotions, which may not always be the best ways to make decisions. Employers discriminating in workplaces make matters worse because in today's economy, finding jobs aren't the easiest to do now, especially since jobs are closing quick because of their business sales, and an insufficient amount of employees a job isn't able to maintain. People now-a-days in the world do their most to be able to maintain a job or even a good job that pays very well at that, so for an employer to just take advantage of someone or show them an unfair side that an employer may not show others that are in their favor. When this happens people usually resign from their jobs, do something purposeful to get fired, will do something heinous to jeopardize the job and put them out of business for good.