Many moons ago, during the summer between 7th and 8th grades, I was involved in a violent accident. I was run-over.
My skull was cracked wide-open, both legs were broken, multiple ribs broken, my shoulder was scraped down to the bone (and then some), among many other injuries suffered. I was unconscious for 3 days. Endured multiple surgeries. It took almost 3 weeks before I could even start to comprehend what happened. It was 6 months later before I healed enough to learn to walk again. I missed the first half of 8th grade. 30 years later, I'm still scarred from head to toe. It is without exaggeration that I say I'm lucky to be alive.
The driver who hit me was stone sober. No alcohol, no drugs, nothing. Clean as a whistle.
Now, let me ask you ... What difference did the guy's sobriety make? Why on Earth would I even care about the content of the perpetrator's blood? Did his sobriety somehow, someway, as if by magic, make the severe injuries I suffered more palatable? Of course not! His sobriety wasn't worth a hill of beans.
Every crime committed by a drunk driver is still a crime when committed by a sober driver. Reckless driving is no more acceptable from a sober driver than it is from a drunk driver. Manslaughter is manslaughter. Damage is damage. Crime is crime. Since sobriety doesn't make a crime any more palatable than drunkenness makes it worse, what's the point of drunk driving laws?
But, but ... the probability of a drunk driver committing a crime is greater than that of a sober driver. OK, now we're getting somewhere ...
We're punishing probabilities - statistics - not actual crimes.
Are you sure you want the government, in our (supposedly) free society, dealing in probabilities rather than actual crime? Are we really willing to lock people up because they may (or may not) commit an actual crime?
What about the sober driver who hit me? Should he have been arrested prior to the accident too, since there was a probability that he'd commit a crime sober (as he did)? Should all drivers go to jail as a precaution? Hey, since anyone behind the wheel is capable of killing someone on the spot, maybe we should just criminalize driving altogether. What do you think?
The driver who hit me didn't go to jail, nor did I press charges. He was badly injured in the accident too. Suing him would have solved nothing. Throwing him in jail would have solved nothing.
Yet, if he had been drunk, he would have gone to jail. Why? What difference would that make? None. Zip. Zero ... other than destroy his life ... which couldn't possibly be good for society.
Sobriety doesn't make a crime more palatable. Drunkenness doesn't make a crime worse. So, what's the point of drunk driving laws?
In truth, drunk driving laws have nothing to do with actual crime and everything to do with prohibition. What has been criminalized is an arbitrary amount of drinking, not actual harm to people or property. Literally, the content of your blood has been criminalized!
You no longer own yourself. Your blood is not yours. You belong to the State.
A government that can regulate your blood content has total control over you. It owns you. You are cattle. So, how long before it declares the "right" to regulate the amount of broccoli in your blood stream? Because if it can regulate the alcohol content of your blood, it can surely regulate the amount of broccoli in your blood too.