The prevalence of drunk driving cases is incessant, prompting the current government to adopt a zero-tolerance approach. In recent years, there have been legislative amendments to increase penalties for drunk driving, coupled with vigorous campaigns against driving under the influence. Despite these efforts, the incidence of drunk driving has only shown a slow decline. Shouldn't we consider other potential factors leading to drunk driving instead of relying solely on punitive measures? While harsher penalties may deter some, it's questionable whether imprisoning every offender is suitable, as it could lead to overcrowded prisons and inadvertently foster a cycle of crime within the prison system.
Looking at the legislative process of penalties and administrative sanctions in our country, it's evident that lawmakers believe harsher penalties can alleviate the issue of drunk driving. Some members of the public have even proposed amending laws to treat drunk driving as intentional homicide. However, the majority of offenders are repeat offenders. Why are statutory penalties so severe, yet these individuals continue to engage in drunk driving? Research indicates that nearly 40% of drunk drivers are repeat offenders, with 70% of them suffering from alcohol addiction. Simply relying on punitive measures for drunk driving won't fully address the problem, as alcohol addiction is a brain disorder that can't be overcome solely through willpower. It requires assistance from relevant medical institutions for effective treatment.
Therefore, addressing the issue of drunk driving by focusing on alcohol addiction could indeed greatly improve the situation. This article will explore the problem of drunk driving from a different perspective than traditional criminal law approaches. Instead, it will emphasize combining criminal policy to discuss the issue of drunk driving.
