but I can think of at least one reason it might be understandable.
Short of "this person is going to die if I don't drive them to the hospital right now and I am the most sober person here," there's no justification for drinking and driving. Even that can be really questionable, because you're potentially endangering other people by choosing to drive instead of getting an ambulance, and being inebriated and emotional is going to make it pretty hard to properly assess those risks. It's probably still better to just learn first aid and employ that while waiting for an ambulance instead.
zebatov posted...
If the statistics don't matter, why do they show the negative ones as if they're worse than the positive ones in commercials? Fear-mongering at its finest.
What "positive statistics"? Do drunk drivers spend more time volunteering at puppy orphanages or something? There is no statistical upside to drinking and driving. Absolutely none. The commercials focus on the potential terrible outcomes because it's exactly those terrible outcomes that you're risking by getting behind the wheel, and they need to drive home the gravity of the risks you're choosing to take.
Don't drink and drive. It's extremely simple. Just don't.
I was thinking more if you were being attacked by someone and waiting for the police isn't an option.
Positive being the ones that make it home safe. Ie, almost all of them. You never hear about those. Only the bad that cause accidents or get caught, when they otherwise would have been fine. There are much worse things to worry about in most cities. ---