I dunno... I know I have wildly different views on this kind of thing than most people here, and that's fine. My only point all along is that in many localities police spend a disproportionate amount of effort busting crimes that result in a lot of damage. I grew up in an incredibly rural area. I'm not condoning drunk driving, but out there there just aren't that many cars to have an accident with. People drive drunk on a very regular basis, and most of them drive under 25mph on deserted roads. I'm not condoning it, I'm just saying. If you aren't used to that kind of thing, there is no way to convince you that it really isn't that dangerous, so I'm not going to try. That said, they aren't even focused on stopping drunk driving. They're just busting parties, when they could be busting Meth labs. Apparently 90% of people on this thread are of the opinion that the job of police is to enforce whatever law they can, regardless of the effect that particular criminal behavior has on society. Busting teen drinkers in BFE is of equal importance as stopping Meth production. Got it. They might crash into a deer. It deserves equal police attention as the meth lab next door which might explode, setting the house on fire killing the 4 malnourished, impoverished kids who can't even go to school because their parents are so cranked out. Of course. Stupid me.
No it isn't. 90% of the people in this thread have said - repeatedly - the police don't have the luxury to pick and choose what laws to enforce and which ones not to. They take an oath to uphold the law, no matter how "stupid" that law may be.
Drunk driving in Palo Alto county (to name a rural area) is just as much of a crime as it is in Polk county, just like cooking meth in Bondurant will get you busted just as easily as it would in Emmetsburg.