Nowadays, vehicles flow endlessly on the roads, and traffic accidents, like scars on the urban fabric, are commonplace. However, most of them are merely minor fender-benders, akin to small incidents in daily life, not seriously harmful. On the chessboard of traffic accident responsibility, rear-end collisions seem to be the easiest situation to fall into. Most of the time, the rear vehicle fails to maintain the necessary

Taking full responsibility for the entire distance, after all, one cannot demand the preceding vehicle to take a few steps back to avoid collision. However, when the other party involved in the rear-end collision turns out to be the "protagonist" of drunk driving, will the plot quietly reverse?

    There is a common saying that once an accident occurs due to drunk driving, the driver, like a wronged child, willingly assumes compensation without questioning the attribution of responsibility. Does this imply that the fault of drunk driving is like a brand, and once an accident occurs, the driver must bear the full responsibility like carrying the cross? Actually, it's not like that. Determining responsibility in a traffic accident is like a detective solving a mystery. The key lies in identifying who is the one who ignited the fuse of the accident. If the drunk-driving vehicle follows the rules, neither brakes suddenly nor changes lanes arbitrarily, and you rear-end it due to distracted driving, it is just an ordinary rear-end collision accident, and the responsibility still falls on the rear vehicle, regardless of whether it was drunk driving or not. Because in this accident scenario, drunk driving does not play a direct or indirect "villain" role. Even if the front vehicle is not involved in drunk driving, the sleepwalking driving of the rear vehicle is sufficient to lead to the same outcome. Therefore, drunk driving is not necessarily labeled as full responsibility.

    However, if you can reveal the subtle connection between rear-end collisions and drunk driving with solid evidence, such as the faithful records of a dash cam - the front vehicle swerving like a drunkard, accelerating and decelerating like a roller coaster, or even driving across the lane, provoking other vehicles, deliberately braking suddenly to tease the rear vehicle - then the drunk driving vehicle may need to face the judgment of full responsibility alone. Generally speaking, once a drunk driving vehicle is involved in the slightest fault, its responsibility is often examined like through a magnifying glass. The original possible division of primary and secondary responsibility may, due to the addition of drunk driving, make the drunk driving vehicle bear the cross of full responsibility, but the specific determination still needs to be based on the on-site situation, which is like a weighing scale.

So, why do people often choose to settle privately and pay to resolve the situation when their drunk driving vehicle is clearly innocent? This is not an evasion of responsibility, but rather a fear of severe punishment for drunk driving itself. If they choose not to settle privately and let the traffic police intervene, although the rear vehicle may be held fully responsible, the drunk driving vehicle will not be held accountable. However, the punishment for drunk driving will still follow like a shadow. This has gone beyond the scope of responsibility attribution and is a soul-searching question for drunk drivers.

    It is imperative to understand that the penalties for drunk driving are as severe as a thunderbolt, not to be taken lightly. The ironclad rules of the "Road Traffic Safety Law" clearly stipulate that if a driver operates a vehicle under the influence of alcohol, their driving license will be immediately deducted by 12 points, and they will be detained for a period of six months, with a fine ranging from 1,000 to 2,000 yuan. As for drunk driving, it is even more shocking. The traffic management department of the public security organ will restrain the driver until they sober up, revoke their driving license, impose severe punishment according to the law, and deprive them of the right to regain their driving license for five years. The consequences of drunk driving are particularly severe, with five years of driving ban and criminal liability that may haunt them forever, leading to unimaginable consequences. If the driver is a public official, their promising career may also be tarnished.

    Therefore, once an accident occurs with a drunk driver, the other party will inevitably feel fear, fearing the sound of the siren and willing to pay a heavy price for a private settlement, even if they are not at fault. However, can a drunk driving accident be settled privately? The law has long made it clear that no matter the size of the accident, the path of private settlement is absolutely not feasible. Unless you are ignorant and unaware of the other party's drunk driving, in which case a private settlement may be acceptable. However, some people deliberately pretend to be confused, demand exorbitant compensation, and such behavior is like drinking poison to quench thirst, with endless troubles in the future.

    Firstly, this action is tantamount to condoning lawlessness. How can road traffic order and public safety be maintained? If he continues to drive and causes another accident, or even a fatal one, you will also be held responsible. Secondly, in the case of a private settlement, it is difficult to determine responsibility and compensation. For example, if the loss is only a few thousand yuan, but you demand ten thousand yuan, the other party may turn around and accuse you of extortion the next day, and deny the drunk driving incident. At that time, you will be in an awkward situation. If the compensation demanded is insufficient, and the hidden damage to the vehicle is difficult to detect, with the exterior intact but the interior fragmented, it will be even more difficult to seek compensation.

Therefore, when rear-ending a drunk driving vehicle, it is best to follow the rules and go through the normal process. Unless the accident is minor and only involves a minor collision, one should weigh the pros and cons to ensure their own rights and interests are not compromised.