"Let's ask the victim of the average drunken driver what they think,:
Funny you should say that cuz you arer talking to one right now. ARE you listening?
"I'm pretty sure the victim of the average drunken driver will be silent--because I would take bets that the average drunken driver makes it home scot-free"
Many that are caught go off scott free too. I see a problem with that, do You?
"What these laws do is harshly criminalize behavior that so many people get away with"
That is exactly why you see BAC's going down and down people aren't listening quite yet.
"Funny you should say that cuz you arer talking to one right now. ARE you listening?"
---I have been listening, but you haven't had much to say besides how anyone who's against your point of view is a terrorist. I said the AVERAGE 'victim' of a drunk driver. And my point was that the average drunk driver doesn't have a victim, because I'd put money on most drunk drivers making it home fine. That doesn't mean I approve of drunk driving, or that I approve of your preaching as if your victim status should accord your lame 'arguments' more validity. I think drunk driving ought to be punished in a way that specifically stops drunk driving. Not with license revocations and checkpoints on highways. How about checkpoints in front of BARS, for example? Or simply requiring places that legally sell alcohol to confirm the legality of their drinkers on the way out they way they must confirm them on the way in?
"Many that are caught go off scott free too. I see a problem with that, do You?"
---It depends on why. But if you commit the crime, generally, you should be punished for it in a way that prevents recidivism. Not 'rehabilitated.' Punished.
"That is exactly why you see BAC's going down and down people aren't listening quite yet."
---That's right, some of you are not listening. Because lowering BACs ain't working. It's just putting more 'drunks' out on the street and making police more likely to arrest people whose actual impairment is questionable. When you make it illegal to drink at all, you simply annoy legal drinkers and make them more likely to be lawbreakers, because the laws are simply easily broken.
Prohibition didn't work the first time, either.
Would you support equal prosectuion of all drivers causing property/personal damage to others, regardless of being sober or drunk?