Most can see how alcohol and drugs should be outlawed when a person is driving a car. With the increased risk of accident, our drunken-driving laws are seen as wise and necessary.
But, does it go unnoticed that those who are drunken and drug-impaired are also more likely to make decisions that harm others, period? All kinds of decisions. It is not just when they are behind the steering wheel of a vehicle. Do we acknowledge they are more likely to kill, for example?
Or, am I wrong?
There are, what, 10,000 alcohol-impaired traffic fatalities in a year? Aren't roughly a third of all traffic fatalities the result of alcohol-impaired driving? We can see it would be foolish to not outlaw drunken driving, so we outlaw it.
But what of the other harms brought on by those who are substance impaired? Do we ignore them? Do we somehow say that is different? Do we even keep track of how many murders are committed by the alcohol impaired? (Don't know that I've even ever hear the term, "alcohol-impaired murder.") Do we track the share of murders committed by those who are marijuana-impaired?
Perhaps we do keep some of these statistics. I read of how 37 percent of sexual assaults are committed by those under the influence of alcohol.
It doesn't escape me that 37 percent for sexual assaults is about the same as one-third for traffic fatalities. We have similar results, but we don't have similar standards. Why the double standard? Should there be a double standard? We justify one, but we don't justify the other. Why?
No comments:
Post a Comment