醉驾案件数量攀升的严峻问题引发社会的广泛关注和重视，在刑事理论和政策的视角下，醉驾的入刑体现了积极刑法立法观，但是却具有过度依赖于刑事惩治手段之嫌，未能充分坚持刑法的谦抑性原则。同时，宽严相济的刑事政策并未随着社会发展的需求进行及时、有效的调整，一段时间内严格的刑事政策占据主导，刑事政策未能发挥出应有的灵活性和应时代性的价值。刑事立法和政策的局限性一定程度上影响并促使醉驾案件数量攀升。
醉驾案件的有效治理并非一日之功，应当探寻问题的关键并加以针对性解决。抽象危险犯的认定不应只依靠立法者的预设危险存在，就在实践中不加以具体判断而一律入罪，该做法并不符合立法初衷和社会治理的现实需要，应当要求司法机关综合案件具体情况进行实质判断。醉驾型危险驾驶罪特定构成要件的认定具有局限性，不同地区对于相关法律法规中“道路”“醉酒驾驶”“机动车”的规定，把握标准并不统一，进而招致构成要件的扩大解释，有必要对其进行实质限缩，避免认定范围的差异化和扩大化。对一段时间内执法机关考核机制具有的唯数量论的不合理现状应当予以优化，进行多标准、多要素的考核机制改革。对于执法机关查处机制在空间上的不全面性和时间上的固定性，应当予以改良，进行空间上覆盖核心区域与偏远地区相结合，时间上坚持灵活性与随机性的执法方式改良。行政法目前对于醉驾问题的规定过于单一和惩罚不足，应当完善行政法中关于构成情节显著轻微危害不大情形醉驾的处罚机制，明确处罚范围，实现行刑衔接与刑行衔接的双向奔赴，可设置醉驾行为的从重情节，相应地增加一档有期徒刑的处罚，与累犯制度进行衔接和配合，有效治理实践中醉驾再犯多发的情况。
对于醉驾案件数量攀升的态势，亦应当坚持多元化治理的社会治理模式。如尝试将醉驾纳入到社会信用评价体系，采用酒精检测装置进行源头治理，加大对代驾行业的整治和支持，进行普法教育与开展宣传活动等，进而实现醉驾案件的综合治理、科学治理，助力实现中国式刑事治理现代化。

The serious problem of the increasing number of drunk driving cases has aroused widespread concern and attention from the society. From the perspective of criminal theory and policy, the punishment of drunk driving reflects a positive view of criminal law legislation, but it is suspected of over-relying on criminal punishment means and failing to fully adhere to the principle of modesty and restraint of criminal law. At the same time, the criminal policy of combining leniency with severity has not been timely and effectively adjusted with the needs of social development, and the strict criminal policy has dominated for a period of time, and the criminal policy has failed to give play to the due flexibility and the value of The Times. The limitations of criminal legislation and policies have influenced and contributed to the rise in the number of drunk driving cases.
The effective control of drunk driving cases is not a day's work, we should explore the key to the problem and be targeted to solve. The identification of abstract dangerous crime should not only rely on the preconceived danger existence of the legislator, but also be punished without specific judgment in practice, which is not in line with the original intention of legislation and the actual needs of social governance, and should require the judicial organ to make substantive judgment based on the specific circumstances of the case. The identification of the specific components of the crime of drunk driving has limitations. Different regions have different standards for the provisions of "road", "drunk driving" and "motor vehicle" in relevant laws and regulations, which leads to the expanded interpretation of the components. Therefore, it is necessary to substantially limit them to avoid the differentiation and expansion of the identification scope. It is necessary to optimize the unreasonable quantity-only status quo of the assessment mechanism of law enforcement agencies in a period of time, and reform the assessment mechanism with multi-criteria and multi-elements. For the incomplete spatial and fixed temporal investigation mechanism of law enforcement agencies, it should be improved, combining spatial coverage of core areas and remote areas, and insisting on flexible and random law enforcement methods in time. At present, the provisions of the administrative law on drunk driving are too simple and the punishment is insufficient. It is necessary to improve the punishment mechanism of drunk driving in the circumstances of significant minor harm and little, clarify the scope of punishment, realize the two-way connection between execution and execution, and set up severe circumstances of drunk driving behavior, and correspondingly increase the punishment of one fixed-term imprisonment. To link up and cooperate with the recidivism system, and effectively manage the situation of repeated drunk driving offenses in practice.
For the rising number of drunk driving cases, the social governance model of diversified governance should also be adhered to. For example, try to incorporate drunk driving into the social credit evaluation system, use alcohol detection devices for source control, increase the rectification and support of the agent driving industry, carry out legal education and publicity activities, so as to achieve comprehensive and scientific management of drunk driving cases, and help realize the modernization of Chinese-style criminal governance.