It&#x27;s not a high horse, so much as it&#x27;s an avoidable problem. $59B&#x2F;year in the US is spent on alcohol-related crashes. (Just crashes, not the insane amount of crime that&#x27;s alcohol-related.)<p>There&#x27;s a death every 51 minutes from it. 31% of traffic-related deaths.<p>17% of children under 14 who die in a car crash involving an alcohol-impaired driver. Over half of those are in the vehicle driven by the drunk driver. That&#x27;s utter insanity, and I wonder how many of those people were close to the limit and something you&#x27;d deem just fine.<p>I&#x27;m not naive enough to think everyone at the restaurant took Uber or have a designated driver, but I trust <i>you&#x27;re</i> also not naive enough to think that it&#x27;s not a serious problem, and it&#x27;s one that, more often as not, kills innocents.<p>The problem is that people can get away with it, and largely do. (As you allude to.)<p>Please don&#x27;t pretend it&#x27;s a small problem, and that discussing whether longer&#x2F;harsher&#x2F;different sentences would motivate more people to take Uber or get a designated driver is the problem. That&#x27;s as counterproductive as adopting a smug tone when discussing policy.<p>Edit:<p>&gt; I suppose at some point you can create such massive penalties for every possible misdeed that people become too terrified to leave their homes, but I don&#x27;t want to live in that world.<p>Enough with the straw man, BTW. I&#x27;m pretty Libertarian. But the moment you demonstrate that you can&#x27;t safely manage the responsibility of driving, then I&#x27;m all in favor of strongly limiting your ability to do others harm. It&#x27;s the height of American selfishness to think that the current system is sufficient relative to the problem that exists.