The dangers of drinking and driving persist
While growing up, I am sure we all constantly heard from parents, guardians, and health teachers alike, “Don’t drink and drive,” but how much has this rhetoric actually settled into the minds of the general population? It does not seem much, as a report in 2021 shows that there was a 14% increase in alcohol-related motor vehicle deaths from the previous year. It is estimated that 37 people die from drunk-driving incidents in the United States each day alone.
If the language surrounding driving under the influence is so prevalently negative, why does it seem that the rates of incidents remain so high? I would like to argue that it is exactly because of the prevalence of this rhetoric. I am sure we have all heard of issues surrounding collective desensitization when it comes to large-scale equity issues—and while this itself is something I could write articles upon articles about—I think it is vital to consider how this desensitization might work on smaller, or less commonly associated concerns.
On the legal level, there have been various efforts to try and dissuade people from driving while under the influence. One of the main distinctions the law makes is between driving under the influence (DUI/DUII) versus driving while intoxicated (DWI). Though, on the surface, this differentiation may seem semantical, the reality is that the two have rather different qualifiers and legal repercussions. For a DUI, the law qualifies that for the general, legal public that can drink, driving with a blood alcohol content (BAC) anywhere above 0.00% and below 0.079% is allowed. A DWI charge, then, quantifies any instance of a general, legal member of the public who is pulled over with a BAC anywhere above the legal limit of 0.08%.
Within the bounds of the law, there are veritable consequences that one can be charged with if they are found in violation of either of these metrics. Some of these include, but are not limited to: an ungraded misdemeanor to a second-degree misdemeanor, probation time, license suspensions, jail time, ignition interlock, and up to $10,000 in fines. While we would hope this would be enough to dissuade the public from drinking under the influence—the statistics do not seem to back this up.
Beyond all these legal consequences, though, what I feel is more important are the very real humanitarian and moral considerations. People who choose to participate in substance use and then operate a motor vehicle are a danger to the public. Substance use can affect one’s judgment, reaction time, motor functions, depth perception, and much more. All of these elements are vital to possess when attempting to be a safe, proactive, defensive driver who is aware of fellow motorists, pedestrians, and property alike. This means that when one drives under the influence they are sacrificing their integrity as a driver and trust the public and government put into licensed drivers to act in their best interest and the interest of the general public when it comes to safety and common decency.
If you have been using any kind of substance that alters your ability to drive, my advice is simple: do not do it! While you might think that a five-minute ride down the road can’t go that bad, or that there is no way a serious accident could happen to or because of you—do not let that influence your sense of morality. This belief that we are all invincible, that bad things happen to other people, is a type of dangerous self-belief that has the real ability to impact real people—including the driver—in irreparable and lasting ways.
Thumbnail Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons