Methods: We obtained 2010 data on state-level drinking-driving laws and individual-level self-reported drinking-driving from archival sources (Alcohol Policy Information System, NHTSA, and Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System). We measured enforcement of the laws via a 2009 survey of state patrol agencies. We computed multilevel regression models (separate models for each type of law) that first examined how having the state law predicted drinking-driving, controlling for various state- and individual-level covariates; we then added the corresponding enforcement measure as another potential predictor.
Results: We found that states with a sobriety checkpoint law, compared with those without a law, had 18.2% lower drinking-driving; states that conducted sobriety checks at least monthly (vs. not conducting checks) had 40.6% lower drinking-driving (the state law variable was not significant when enforcement was added). We found no significant association between having an open container law and drinking-driving, but states that conducted open container enforcement, regardless of having a law, had 17.6% less drinking-driving.
Conclusion: Our results suggest that having a sobriety checkpoint law and conducting checkpoints as well as enforcement of open containers laws may be effective strategies for addressing drinking-driving. 相似文献
Objective: The objective of this survey is to investigate perceptions regarding enforcement of the 0.05 g/dL BAC limit.
Method: Opinions of law enforcement officers, prosecutors, and defense attorneys were obtained through a series of questionnaires and focus groups.
Results: Survey data were collected from 32 law enforcement officers, 20 prosecutors, and 4 defense attorneys. The participants rated the usefulness of the NHTSA's driving while intoxicated (DWI) driving cues lower for the 0.05 limit than for the 0.08 law. Some of the participants believed that training would be needed in regard to sobriety testing under the 0.05 limit. Participants also stated that adequately preparing for prosecution of drunk drivers would be more difficult under the 0.05 limit. In addition, it was believed that drunk driving cases are more likely to be withdrawn and fewer plea agreements and guilty pleas are likely under the 0.05 limit. Prosecutors were concerned that the 0.05 limit would result in poorly investigated cases and overburden the court system. Defense attorneys were concerned about the social and economic costs of a 0.05 limit.
Discussion: Overall, it appears that the 0.05 limit is viewed as enforceable and it will save lives; however, the usefulness of the NHTSA DWI Detection Guide and of the standardized field sobriety tests need to be established for lower BACs, and efforts must be made to educate people regarding the relationship between BAC and impairment and impairment and driving with the risk of injury and death.
Conclusion: Though the 0.05 limit offers promise in saving lives, the following issues associated with changing the limit to 0.05 need to be resolved prior to implementation: Validating the sobriety tests for the 0.05 limit; if needed, modifying the sobriety tests to make them effective and valid at the 0.05 limit; and training law enforcement personnel and educating the public regarding the 0.05 limit. 相似文献
Methods: The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) Transportation Research Board (TRB), Alcohol, Other Drugs, and Transportation Committee (ANB50) sponsored a workshop held at the NAS facility in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, on August 24–25, 2015, to discuss the lack of progress in reducing impaired driving and to make recommendations for future progress. A total of 26 experts in research and policy related to alcohol-impaired driving participated in the workshop. The workshop began by examining the static situation in the rate of alcohol-impaired driving fatal crashes to determine what factors may be inhibiting further progress. The workshop then discussed 8 effective strategies that have not been fully implemented in the United States. Workshop participants (16 of the 26) rated their top 3 strategies.
Results: 3 strategies received the most support: 1. Impose administrative sanctions for drivers with BACs = 0.05 to 0.08 g/dL.
2. Require alcohol ignition interlocks for all alcohol-impaired driving offenders. 3. Increase the frequency of sobriety checkpoints, including enacting legislation to allow them in the 11 states that currently prohibit them.5 other important strategies included the following: (1) increase alcohol taxes to raise the price and reduce alcohol consumption; (2) reengage the public and raise the priority of impaired driving; (3) lower the illegal per se BAC limit to 0.05 for a criminal offense; (4) develop and implement in-vehicle alcohol detection systems; and (5) expand the use of screening and brief interventions in medical facilities.
Conclusions: Each of these strategies is proven to be effective, yet all are substantially underutilized. Each is used in some jurisdictions in the United States or Canada, but none is used extensively. Any one of the 3 strategies implemented on a widespread basis would decrease impaired driving crashes, injuries, and fatalities. Based on the research, all 3 together would have a substantial impact on the problem. 相似文献