The inconvenient truth of the matter is nearly all drivers are guilty of habits that are a danger to the public - some even moreso than being in the 0.08-0.12 range - caring for a child in the backseat, messing with your car's interior, holding an emotional conversation, taking your daily anxiety medication, texting your spouse, etc. The cultural stigmatization against drunk driving isn't necessarily bad, but the treatment of those who are guilty, especially when virtually everyone who has ever had alcohol has been guilty of drinking and driving at some point in their life, is just a poor substitute for intelligent reform.
If we had 2 theoretical drivers responsible for a collision: one of which was probably distracted by the radio, and the other person probably affected by the 2 glasses of wine consumed earlier that hour, most people would tag that second person as more criminal with no good cause. We really need to revaluate that mindset. Either we enforce our ethical opposition to distraction across the board, or we start to see the issue as different levels of complexity.