That's obvious, so I'll 'splain it different Lucy. There are approximately 42,000 traffic fatalities each year. Of these, approximately 500 people are killed by drunk drivers. The other 41,500 people are killed by non drunk drivers. But, if you were a mighty and powerful Deputy, you would join the national jihad against the drunk drivers who killed 500 people, but you wouldn't be too much concerned about the drivers who killed the other 41,500 would you?
"If it were within my authority and responsibility to prosecute those who do, I assure you, I would, with as much excellence and commitment as I do whatever I do."
That is pretty much what is happening now. They are muchly excellently committingly prosecuting those who are legally classified as "drunk" while missing the really bad drunks. Why should you be any different?
"Oh, let me see, I think I see your "logic" -- pitiful as it is. You appear to be proposing that, since "only" 1 out of 84 traffic deaths is attributable to a drunk driver (your stat), that, what, try to stop it is a bias against drunk drivers?"
First, it's not "my" stat, as you will read from the link.
"that, what, try to stop it is a bias against drunk drivers?""
Sorry, that is incoherent, please rephrase it.
"First of all, drunk driving is entirely preventable. How many of the other 83 deaths are?"
Probably 83.
"Next, of the people who drive drunk, what percentage of them cause debilitating or fatal traffic injuries and/or property damage? Do you suppose it occurs at the same rate as those who drive unimpaired by alcohol?"
Oh c'mon Lucy. Put on your thinking cap. If the number of people killed in traffic fatalities is approximately 84 to 1 of non-drunks to drunks, how would the ratio of other injuries and property damage be significantly different?
"What do you suppose the proportions are of deaths per drunk driver, versus deaths per drivers as a whole?"
Drunks kill approximately 1/84. Non drunks kill approximately 84/1. Unnerstan?
"Here's your argument right back at you: many, many times more people - thousands of times more -- will die from heart attacks, industrial accidents, crime, drunk drivers, you name -- than will be killed by terrorists this year -- than have ever been killed by terrorists. So, why do we "have it in" for terrorists?"
Here's your point right back. It's not relevant to this thread.
Do you drive drunk, or do you make money off of drunk drivers?