i'm not saying you have a right to be safe, because i agree life is inherently unsafe, but i am saying you have a right to not be put at risk *by another person*

Well, that and lawyers.

Well now we're just talking about odds.

Lawyers can only operate on laws

What determines what's risky? 1/2? 1/10? 1/1000? etc. And what has to be the outcome? A scratch? Loss of a limb? Death?

there are never any clear lines with any morals
moral principles should always be combined with common sense

Death is a likely scenario if you are hit by a drunk driver

Death is a likely scenario if you are hit by a fast moving automobile. Whether the driver is drunk or not.

Hello everyone.

Not really. There was no law saying Mc Donalds had to put "hot" on a cup of coffee.
Everyone knows coffee is hot. The fact that some moron spilled it on their lap and sued mcdonalds is why it now las that label

Now they can't be sued for it

But being drunk increases the chances that you will harm someone

If you are driving

you have a good argument there, paradox
the risk of death by a sober driver should be put in comparison to the risk of a drunk driver

Sure, so does being sleep deprived, but that's legal.

yeah good points

Not necessarily

Driving impaired is illegal

Being in a busier town also increases your chances.

Which includes being sleepy

Sleepiness is harder to account for though.

If you fall asleep at the wheel, you can be charged

Also, sleepness is impossible to prove after the fact.

adreniline kicks in after an accident

aint sleepy no more

i think the general argument provided is that the difference in risk compared to normal accepted risk should be significant

They can charge you with reckless driving based on the accident forensics

Yes, but I'm talking moreso about prevention of sleepiness, which is sleep. You can't exactly force someone to sleep either, especially if they have a demanding position that requires long hours.

how significant drunk driving is in comparison is up for debate
but it kind of seems significant to me
but i dunno

In general, impaired driving should be illegal

Which includes drunk driving

How many card accidents are directly caused by drunk drivers and what percentage is that of total car accidents?

See, I disagree. I think impaired driving is fine. Until you hit someone or something.

28 percent of road fatalities

I feel like what is classified as impairing needs to be further elaborated on by lawmakers. Even with some flushed out examples, I feel there needs to be more defining details.

Are caused by drunk drivers

At least it was in 2016

It fluctuates yearly

you also have to account for the different levels of intoxication

So, you are still more likely to die in an accident that isn't related to drunk driving.

Yes, but driving in a way that increases the chances of a wreck is illegal