Ever since the “Master Yeh (葉少爺)” drunk driving incident claimed three lives earlier this year, drunk driving has become a significant public safety issue with legal and social implications. Despite the police taking a tougher stance in enforcing laws against drunk driving, there has been no discernible improvement to the situation and drunk driving accidents continue to happen. Clearly, the idea that it is alright to drive while under the influence of alcohol is ingrained into people’s minds and efforts by the police to enforce the law have made little headway. One of the main reasons for this is that the Ministry of the Interior has been left to fight most of the battle alone, with neither the full support of other ministries nor active public participation.
For this problem to be properly addressed, it must be approached on social, psychological and environmental levels and attacked through education, engineering and legislative measures. The responsibility should not be left entirely to the ministry and neither can the solution be to solely increase punishments or ban such behavior. A large police presence on the streets, conducting spot Breathalyzer tests, might have an effect, but an initiative like this cannot be sustained for long, as the authorities will not be able to commit the resources needed for extended periods.
Another problem that must be addressed is the prevailing attitude among the public that they will not get caught if they drink and drive. If people think they will get away with it, there is little point in merely toughening legal sanctions. Making drunk driving punishable is not the answer, because this is more retributive than preventative, and takes effect only when the damage has already been done. It is not a long-term solution and the results it yields do not justify the effort or resources expended on it.
Drinking and driving is a serious public safety issue and a worrying social problem. According to the National Police Agency, there have been more than 400 fatalities related to drunk driving per year in recent years. The death toll between 2002 and last year stood at 4,512, far higher than deaths caused by SARS (779), Typhoon Morakot (724) or the 921 Earthquake (2,347). A government watchdog survey shows there are, on average, more than 7,000 drunk driving accidents in Taiwan per year, with an average of 1.07 fatalities per accident, at a cost to the country of NT$3 billion (US$100 million) in national insurance and medical fees. This shows that drunk driving can cause more deaths in Taiwan than natural disasters and epidemics and is a serious risk to public safety and a drain on national economic resources.
What is important is to find a way to prevent this behavior before it happens, instead of just meting out punishments after the fact. It is known that a driver under the influence will have impaired sensory perception and slowed motor reactions. Social-psychological studies have also shown that alcohol makes people disregard social conventions and laws, and also makes them less alert or aware of the risks of accident. The behavioral norms that members of the public abide by must be changed so that people are motivated less by what others think and more by what they themselves believe and are even driven by a sense of justice rather than an obligation to keep within the confines of the law.
Life is precious, yet one hears on an almost daily basis of someone losing their life because of somebody else’s drunk driving. Time and again families are struck by tragedy and dreams are shattered. There is no guarantee that this will not happen to you, or to a loved one: In that, it is a modern-day sword of Damocles.
People have to understand the real and immediate importance of eradicating drunk driving and that it is not just an abstract good for the benefit of others. The personal catastrophes caused by this behavior are preventable if the will exists to do so. It is not just a job for the government, it should be regarded as a social struggle requiring the concerted participation of the public — a new civic movement, if you will — with the goal of reducing drunk driving to the lowest level possible.
In the 1980s, a group of mothers in the US formed the group Mothers Against Drunk Driving to draw attention to the problem. Although they vented their anger on individual drunk drivers, they also forced the US government, Congress and judiciary to recognize the seriousness of the problem. Japanese also view drunk driving as a public issue and one can often see stickers around the streets of Japan reminding everyone that drunk driving is public enemy No. 1.
The idea that one cannot drink and drive should be inculcated from an early age as a civic virtue and internalized in adults as a norm. Therefore, the Ministry of Education’s Department of Elementary Education and Department of Social Education should endeavor to educate people about this issue. Members of the public and civic groups should also work together in promoting the idea.
In addition, a law should be passed requiring car manufacturers to install a device for measuring alcohol levels on a driver’s breath that will prevent the car from starting if the driver is over the legal limit. According to the Ministry of Transportation and Communications, the reoffending rate for drunk driving is as high as 31.43 percent, so this device should at the very least be installed in the cars of offenders. This could go some way toward reducing the number of drunk driving accidents.
Chiou Tian-juh is a professor of social psychology at Shih Hsin University.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath