BUT I would venture the unpopular notion that this also applies a bit to the question of driving under the influence of alcohol. People have varying tolerance levels, varying definitions of 'drunk', varying driving and decision-making skills...
I think it is a little too DARE to blanket-condemn at the same level of horror and indignation someone who has had a few drinks and decides they are safe to drive home versus someone rip-roaring drunk, or a 17-year old with 3 beers in him versus a 47-year old with the same.
I will second this unpopular notion. I will generally say that
most people who condemn all drunk drivers have never known a person who was arrested for a DUI. Plenty of these people will go out to dinner and have a glass or two of wine, which could possibly put them over .08 BAC, and still talk about the evils of "drunk" driving.
I might be unwise to admit this, but I have been arrested for a DUI. I was pulled over for an expired plate (I had the new sticker in my glove box, but just hadn't gotten around to attaching it), the cop said he smelled beer and asked me to blow in a tube, and shortly thereafter I was being cuffed and read my rights. I had been carefully following the "one drink per hour" rule and hadn't had anything in two hours.
I was pulled over while giving a friend a ride home. I had been to his place maybe three times, but I easily knew where I was going. My friend was tested and determined to be safe to drive. He proceeded to get lost, in his home town of under 6000 people, driving from a main road to his own apartment that he has lived at for almost two years. I do appreciate that he was able to drive my car legally and keep me from having to deal with an impounded car in addition to all the other crap, but his inability to find his own home makes me seriously question the accuracy of BAC in determining impairment.
I will never say that I didn't make a bad decision. I claim full responsibility and will be careful to the point of paranoid for the rest of my life. However, I can say that harsher penalties (at least for a first offense), are unnecessary. Getting a DUI is
horrible, if you aren't made of money. The fines and fees are huge to a college kid, and they take away your driver's license which makes getting to work so you can actually pay for everything twice as hard. You have to be assessed for addiction, which leads to either rehabilitation or a five week education course, which, if you're like me and a full time student who started working full time to pay off the financial aspects, is really fun to add to your schedule. The night I spent in jail doesn't seem like anything in the grand scheme of this, and I haven't even thought about what my insurance costs are going to be like.
Driving drunk is a bad thing. I can agree with that. But in my opinion the legal system surrounding it is flawed. Harsher punishments, at least for first time offenders, won't help anything. I had no idea what kind of shit I'd have to deal with for a DUI, because I sure didn't say "hmm, I drive around wasted a lot so I should really learn what the punishments are for these things." First timers are usually honest mistakes of not knowing what .08 means. People with second, third, and more, on the other hand, deserve strict punishments, although I think the current approach of "jump through these hoops and we'll say you're not a problem drinker" should be revised to focus on individual rehabilitation, not paying a certain dollar amount and meeting some requirements. Based on my experience, if you get more than one of these bitches you are clearly very addicted and need some real intervention, because seriously, after all this shit I don't think I'll get near a car if I've used mouthwash in the last 24 hours.
This might be tl:dr, but I've been debating making this post since the topic was brought up.