Drunk Driving = Charged Twice

To start with, no, neither I nor anyone that I know just got a DUI.

My question is: Why is drunk driving a crime?

Let me know where I go wrong with these few points:

1. If a driver is completely sober, drives a ways, and does not have an accident, then there is no victim and should be no crime.
2. If a driver is drunk, drives a ways, and does not have an accident, then there is no victim and should be no crime.
3. If a driver is completely sober, but while driving, is at fault for an accident, then there is a victim and the responsible driver has committed a crime and should pay for damages.
4. If a driver is drunk, and while driving, is at fault for an accident, then there is a victim and the responsible driver has committed a crime and should pay for damages.

The way it works now is that driver 2 will be charged with a crime despite there being no victim, and driver 4 will be charged with two crimes despite there being only one (set of) victim(s).

Why should driver 2 be charged with a crime at all?  Because he is potentially more likely to have an accident?  If "potentially more likely" is all it takes to be a crime, then why isn't driving a car "potentially more likely" to cause an accident then not owning one?

If "potentially more likely" is all that it takes, then where is my Nobel Prize for Medicine?  I once owned a chemistry set and therefore aren't I "potentially more likely" to cure cancer?

If "potentially more likely" is all that it takes, then, because I own a ladder, were is my award for saving people from burning buildings?

Why is "potentially more likely" all that is necessary for a crime?  What, then, isn't a potential crime?  Why isn't their a potential for heroics and appropriate rewards?

Driver 4 is at fault for an accident, but why is he treated differently than driver 3.  Both drove cars, both caused accidents, both created victims.  What is the difference between them?  Why should driver 4 be charged twice for one crime?

If you have lost loved ones due to drunk drivers, then I am sorry for your loss.  But how is their loss different that it would have been had the driver been sober when the accident occurred?

Charging people for crimes when there is no victim is a terrible thing to do.

Causing damage to someone is already rightly illegal; why do we charge some of those offenders twice for committing one crime?