You can be sure that all my crimes were committed in a sober state, full with intention and though not legal maybe with a moral reasoning behind them. Nevertheless, I might have been drunk afterwards.

It depends— Did you plan and premeditate before hand?

Nahhhh actions have consequences!

That should be up to the judge's discretion. Same way insanity pleas or "crimes of passion" are handled. Personally I don't think it's a valid excuse.

Yes. the victim should have compensations. The criminal should be sentenced also to leave alcohol for a period of time equivalent with the part reduced in the sentence. Random time alcohol test should be applied under the penalty of restoring full charges.

Nah, because drunkenness is something that you knowingly and willingly do to yourself ... I think it's a better case if, say, a medication you started taking caused unexpected violent mood swings or something like that

IMO, no. If getting drunk causes you to be more likely to commit crimes, then the responsibility simply must be shifted toward not getting drunk. Otherwise it's not fair and an ordinate number of drinking-related crimes will be committed and people will be hurt. (Note that I don't think any "punishment" should be about retribution in the first place, so it's not like it matters whether it was the perpetrator's "fault" or not in terms of how heinous they are or whatever. It should only matter what their chances of doing it again are, or how much the law's enforcement deters everybody else from doing it..)