This article contrasts the dominant and the challenging paradigms of drunk driving. In the dominant paradigm, the "typical" drunk driver is viewed as blameworthy, highly and visibly impaired, with a high blood alcohol content, and having experienced previous crashes and contact with an ineffective legal system; the driver's victims are viewed as nondrinkers; and a differentiation is made between a safe drinking-and-driving level and "drunk" driving. This paradigm, however, stands in contrast to various empirical data. In the challenging paradigm, drunk driving is viewed as a predictable product of social institutions, furthered by interests vested in their maintenance; it views the need for reduced fatalities, not goals of morality and justice, as the basis of prevention policies to be developed. Certain and swift, rather than more severe, punishment is viewed as promising in deterring drunk drivers. Recommendations based in law and criminal justice, alcohol policy, transportation policy, and injury control are presented.