Originally Posted by
Knoe Itawl
You're really attempting to hold on to your point Real Men, but ultimately driving drunk is worse. You seem to be basing your argument on "intent", maintaining that he didn't intend to hurt anyone by driving drunk and he intended to hurt his wife by hitting her.
Where your argument fails is that intent is irrelevant. Jason Kidd, at his age, should certainly be well aware of the fact that driving drunk is potentially deadly. Therefore, by choosing to get behind the will drunk it's really the same as being grossly negligent. I'm not going to pretend that I haven't known people who have driven drunk and that I haven't known basically good people who have. But at the end of the day it's an indefensible, selfish act, no matter how common.
It's like someone throwing a shopping cart off of a roof for fun. The intent might not have been to seriously harm the person below, but anyone who isn't mentally deficient should know the potential danger in doing so. So it's just as good as if they did intend it, if they hit someone.
Additionally, the potential for havoc goes far beyond one person. Injuries or death could potentially be multiple people.
I do understand what you're saying in that the intentional act of abusing your mate is more evil than the non intentional act of driving drunk. However, driving drunk is worse solely because of the potential damage, not because of the character of the individual committing each act. That's where I think the disconnect is.