I see you’re one of those gun control people. Its the same thing. Did he harm someone? Did he harm another’s property? No. This is a big nothing burger. Unless there is actual harm- financial losses, or physical injury to another person, the government should not be involved. P E R I O D.
As far as drinking and driving- you could easily come up with real statistics to show the possibility of harm where this is concerned because it happens so frequently. It would be hard to come up with such for this bonehead event. But even with that, the government does NOT just revoke your license to drive on the first offense. You get caught, you pay a big fine, you have to go to a weekend reeducation thing (here in Ohio) and you have to pay a shitload for insurance for 5 years, but you don’t lose your license for the first two times you get caught.
Whatever. You are free to think what you want to think, but really, its government overreach just like i’ve said.
Its illegal to hurt people.
Its illegal to kill people.
its illegal to damage other people’s property.
Its even illegal to destroy other people’s property.
We don’t need redundant laws and we don’t need more government overreach or oversight.
The problem is grossly irresponsible people will eventually hurt someone if they are permitted to continue the activity. What would this moron do next if he were permitted to keep his license? Maybe he would land on a highway? Or fly under the Golden Gate bridge? Or engage in some other reckless activity that has tremendous potential for causing damage or injury. The goal is to make sure reckless people are stopped BEFORE they cause injury or damage. This has nothing to do with government overreach and everything to do with protecting society from reckless idiots.