What is the real point here? Consider this, regarding any law.

The only way you can stop people from hurting other people is to put them in a straight-jacket.

Drunk driving laws don't keep a first-time offender from hurting or killing anyone. What the drunk driving laws do is to take away freedoms guaranteed by the Constitutions.

If there were no drunk driving laws, and somebody went out and hurt or killed someone else while driving drunk, the same things would happen as if he hurt the other person any any other way. He would have to pay.

The laws muddy the water. They take the focus off payment for the harm being done and place the focus on some make-believe, governmental inventions. The result is loss of freedom for the people, and increased revenue for Government that they don't really deserve.

What would happen if all the driving laws were only warnings. Disobey the warnings all you want. Be free. Go ahead. You are in control of your life. But the minute you hurt someone or his property, you lose your freedom. Especially if you are disobeying the warning signs.

If people were not badgered by a bunch of laws that often are stupid and useless, they would learn how to take responsibility for their lives... or they would be paying off a debt for  damaging someone else's property... or they would be executed for killing someone else. Now tell me that wouldn't perk the people up.

There are always those who will disobey the law if you don't put them in a straight-jacket. You don't know who they are ahead of time, so they are going to do the damage, with or without the laws. So let's get rid of 90% of the laws out there, reduce the size of this unnecessary government, and take our freedom and dignity back.

 

Now the feds want to force states to charge drivers as criminals that have blood-alcohol level of 0.08 percent, that those drivers must be severely punished. Note: 0.08 percent blood-alcohol can be reached in less than two drinks. The National Restaurant Association apparently believes 0.08 percent blood-alcohol level is extremely low. While tourist towns can bring in more Taxis, the average working stiff won’t pay cab fare for a ride home just for having one drink. It is foreseeable bars and restaurants will lose many of their non-alcoholic patrons, destroying their business. Looking deeper, the threat of arrest for driving with a 0.08 percent blood-alcohol level effectively targets Citizens’ freedom to associate with others when having one drink can subjects you to being arrested; Citizens will go out less and stay home more. Court ordered Drug & alcohol rehab is a $12-Billion dollar annual industry, grossing so much money it employs federal lobbyists. Not to allege there is a connection between the feds wanting to charge drivers as criminals whose blood-alcohol levels is 0.08, one intelligently must consider how much more money private alcohol rehabs will make by states lowing the blood-alcohol level to 0.08. This will result in charging and treating honest Citizens as criminals who have had no more than one or two drinks.

The law stems from the idea that you have a duty to be in control of your car while driving it.  It was observed that while drunk, you are not in control of your car.  Therefor, you may not drive while drunk.  

I found another great article on the subject on Reason.com that cites a study that found when the 'legal limit' was lowered from .1 to .08 BAC alcohol related deaths increased. Law enforcement targets the least dangerous and most numerous people because they are easier to catch in their net, giving them more convictions and more revenue. They should focus on impaired/reckless driving instead of alcohol. I think you could go as far as to say that drunk driving laws kill. http://reason.com/archives/2010/10/11/abolish-drunk-driving-laws