Drunk driving is the act of operating and/or driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs to the degree that mental and motor skills are impaired. It is illegal in all jurisdictions within the U.S. The specific criminal offense is usually called driving under the influence [of alcohol and/or other drugs] (DUI), and in some states driving while intoxicated (DWI), operating while impaired (OWI), or operating a vehicle under the influence (OVI). Such laws may also apply to boating or piloting aircraft. Vehicles can include farm machinery and horse-drawn carriages.

In the United States the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) estimates that 17,941 people died in 2006 in "alcohol-related" collisions, representing 40 percent of total traffic deaths in the US. NHTSA states 275,000 were injured in alcohol-related accidents in 2003 according to DOT HS 809775, a.k.a. Traffic Safety Facts 2003. NHTSA defines fatal collisions as "alcohol-related" if they believe the driver, a passenger, or an occupant of the vehicle (such as a pedestrian or pedal cyclist) had a blood alcohol content (BAC) of 0.01 or greater. NHTSA defines nonfatal collisions as "alcohol-related" if the accident report indicates evidence of alcohol present. NHTSA specifically notes that "alcohol-related" does not necessarily mean a driver or non occupant was tested for alcohol and that the term does not indicate a collision or fatality was caused by the presence of alcohol.^[1] On average, about 60 percent of the BAC values are missing or unknown. To analyze what they believe is the complete data, statisticians simulate BAC information.^[2] Drivers with a BAC of 0.10 are 6 to 12 times more likely to get into a fatal crash or injury than drivers with no alcohol.^[3]

Contents 1 Laws 1.1 Driving under the influence of drugs 1.2 Physician reporting 1.3 Penalties 1.4 DUI plates 1.5 Flying while drunk and related laws 2 History of drunk driving laws 3 Typical DUI investigation and arrest 3.1 Reasonable Suspicion to stop 3.2 Investigation 3.3 Field Sobriety Tests 3.4 Probable cause to arrest 3.5 Chemical test 3.6 Booking and charging 4 Driving While Impaired courts 5 SR-22 6 Interventions 7 International Comparisons 8 See also 9 References

[edit] Laws

All states in the U.S. designate a per se blood or breath alcohol level as the threshold point for an independent criminal offense. A second criminal offense of driving "under the influence" or "while impaired" is also usually charged in most states, with a permissive presumption of guilt where the person's blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is .08 percent or greater (units of milligrams per deciliter, representing 8 g of alcohol in 10 liters of blood).^[4] Some states (e.g., Colorado) include a lesser charge, sometimes referred to as driving while ability impaired (this may apply to individuals with a .05 percent or above, but less than the .08 per se limit for the more serious charge.^[4] Wisconsin, however, is the only state that continues to regard first offense drunk driving arrests as a forfeiture.^[5]

The amount of alcohol intake to reach 0.08 percent may vary with the individual's body composition and state of health

Prior to increased emphasis on drinking and driving in the 1980s, standards of .10-.15 percent were in place. The legal limit for commercial drivers in New York is set at 0.04 percent.^[4]

[edit] Driving under the influence of drugs

The key inquiry focuses on whether the driver's faculties were impaired by the substance that was consumed. The detection and successful prosecution of drivers impaired by prescription medication or illegal drugs can therefore be difficult. Breathalyzers have been developed for the purpose of administering roadside or laboratory tests that can detect the actual level of a controlled substance in an individual's body.

[edit] Physician reporting

Six states require physicians to report patients who drive while impaired.^[5] Another 25 states permit physicians to violate doctor-patient confidentiality to report impaired drivers, if they so choose.^[5] The American Medical Association endorsed physician reporting in 1999, but deferred to the states on whether such notification should be mandatory or permissive.^[5] An authority on professional confidentiality, Jacob Appel of New York University, has written that physician reporting is a double-eged sword, because it may deter some patients from seeking care. According to Appel, "Reporting may remove some dangerous drivers from the roads, but if in doing so it actually creates other dangerous drivers, by scaring them away from treatment, then society has sacrificed confidentiality for no tangible return in lives saved."^[5]

[edit] Penalties

Many jurisdictions require more serious penalties (such as jail time, larger fines, longer DUI programs, the installation of ignition interlock devices) in cases where the driver's BAC is over 0.20, or 0.15 in some places. These additional sanctions are an attempt to deter and punish the operation of a vehicle at extremely high BAC levels and the concomitant danger posed to the safety of persons and property by heavily impaired drivers.

Compared to many other countries penalties for drunk driving in the United States are light, unless drink is involved in an incident causing injury or death of others, in which case they are very heavy compared to other nations. See Driving under the influence. Some states, such as Wisconsin, do not revoke driving permits even if the offender is convicted multiple times.

[edit] DUI plates

In 1967, Ohio began to issue special license plates to DUI offenders who are granted limited driving privileges such as work-related driving until a court can rule that they can have full privileges back. However, judges rarely enforced the plates, so in 2004, the plates became mandated by state law to all DUI offenders.^[6] Unlike Ohio's standard-issue plates (which as of 2008 are red and blue on white), the DUI plates are yellow with red writing with no registration stickers or graphics. They are sometimes known as "party plates."^[6] In Minnesota, DUI plates are referred to as "whiskey plates." ^[7]

[edit] Flying while drunk and related laws

Federal Aviation Regulation 91.17 (14 CFR 91.17) prohibits pilots from flying aircraft with an alcohol level of 0.04% or more, and/or within eight hours of consuming alcohol, or while under the impairing influence of any drug.^[8] The same prohibition applies to any other crew members on duty aboard the aircraft (flight attendants, etc.). Some airlines impose additional restrictions, and many pilots also impose stricter standards upon themselves. Commercial pilots found to be in violation of regulations are typically fired or resign voluntarily, and they may lose their pilot certificates and/or be subject to criminal prosecution under Federal or State laws, effectively ending their careers.

Similar laws apply to other activities involving transportation; Michigan prohibits intoxicated bicycling, horseback riding, buggy driving, use of motorized farm implements, or boating, the latter whether a pilot or passenger, with much the same threshold of intoxication.

[edit] History of drunk driving laws

The first jurisdiction in the United States of America to adopt laws against drunk driving was New York in 1910, with California and others following. Early laws simply prohibited driving while intoxicated, requiring proof of a state of intoxication with no specific definition of what level of inebriation qualified.^[9] The first generally-accepted legal limit for blood alcohol concentration (BAC) was 0.15.^{[citation needed]}

In 1938, the American Medical Association created a "Committee to Study Problems of Motor Vehicle Accidents". At the same time, the National Safety Council set up a "Committee on Tests for Intoxication".

In the US, most of the laws and penalties were greatly enhanced starting in the late 1970s, and through the 1990s, largely due to pressure from groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) and Students Against Driving Drunk (SADD) and leaders like Candy Lightner. Most significantly, zero tolerance laws were enacted which criminalized driving a vehicle with 0.01 or 0.02 BAC for drivers under 21.

[edit] Typical DUI investigation and arrest

Following are common procedures when a law enforcement officer has reason to suspect a driver is intoxicated.

[edit] Reasonable Suspicion to stop

There are several situations in which the officer will come into contact with a driver, some examples are:

• The driver has been involved in an automobile accident; the officer has responded to the scene and is conducting an investigation.
• The driver has been stopped at a sobriety checkpoint (also known as roadblocks).
• The police have received a report, possibly from an anonymous citizen, that a described car has been driving erratically. The officer should verify the erratic driving before pulling the driver over. In some cases, the driver will no longer be in the vehicle.
• The officer on patrol has observed erratic, suspicious driving, or a series of traffic infractions indicating the possibility that the driver may be impaired. This is by far the most common reason for stopping a suspect.
• A police officer has stopped a vehicle for a lesser traffic offense, notices the signs of intoxication, and begins the DUI investigation.

The following list of DUI symptoms, from a publication issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (DOT HS-805-711),^[10] is widely used in training officers to detect drunk drivers. After each symptom is a percentage figure which, according to NHTSA, indicates the statistical chances through research, that a driver is over the legal limit.

Turning with wide radius	65
Straddling center or lane marker	65
Appearing to be drunk	60
Almost striking object or vehicle	60
Weaving	60
Driving on other than designated roadway	55
Swerving	55
Slow speed (more than 10mph below limit)	50
Stopping (without cause) in traffic lane	50
Drifting	50
Following too closely	45
Tires on center or land marker	45
Braking erratically	45
Driving into opposing or crossing traffic	45
Signaling inconsistent with driving actions	40
Stopping inappropriately (other than in lane)	35
Turning abruptly or illegally	35
Accelerating or decelerating rapidly	30
Headlights off	30

If the officer observes enough to have a reasonable suspicion to legally justify a further detention and investigation, they will ask the driver to step out of the vehicle.

Reasonable suspicion requires less evidence than probable cause, but more than a mere hunch. A rule of thumb is that reasonable suspicion requires 25 % proof, and probable cause requires more than 50 % statistical chance. Therefore, if there is probable cause for arrest for DWI, as suggested by the research and examples used above, then there is reasonable suspicion to stop a driver.

[edit] Investigation

The officer will typically approach the driver's window and ask some preliminary questions. During this phase of the stop the officer will note if they detect any of the following indicators of intoxication

• odor of an alcoholic beverage on the driver's breath or in the car generally
• slurred speech in response to the questioning
• watery, blood shot, and/or reddish eyes
• flushed face
• droopy eyelids
• difficulty in understanding and responding intelligently to question
• fumbling with his or her driver's license and registration
• the plain-view presence of containers of alcoholic beverages in the vehicle.
• admission of consumption of alcoholic beverage

If the officer observes enough to have a reasonable suspicion to legally justify a further detention and investigation, they will ask the driver to step out of the vehicle.

[edit] Field Sobriety Tests

One of the most controversial aspects of a DUI stop by a police officer involve the Field Sobriety Tests (FSTs). FSTs are heavily subjective to the opinion of the arresting officer. Many sober people are unable to perform the tests properly with a false positive rate of 23% and some are even arrested for failing the tests. ^{[11] [12] [13]} The walk-and-turn test is only 68% accurate, and the one-leg stand test is only 65% accurate in healthy individuals, when determining if a person is under the influence. People with medical conditions, injuries, 65 years or older, and 50 pounds or greater overweight cannot be accurately judged by these tests. The officer will administer one or more field sobriety tests (FSTs). FSTs are "divided attention tests" that theoretically test the suspect's ability to perform the type of mental and physical multitasking that is required to operate an automobile. However, these tests can be problematic for people with nonobvious disabilities affecting proprioception, such as Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. The most commonly administered FSTs include:

• horizontal gaze nystagmus test, which involves following an object with the eyes (such as a pen) to determine characteristic eye movement reaction.^[14]
• walk-and-turn (heel-to-toe in a straight line).
• one-leg-stand.
• modified-position-of-attention (feet together, head back, eyes closed for thirty seconds; also known as the Romberg test).

• finger-to-nose (tip head back, eyes closed, touch the tip of nose with tip of index finger).
• recite all or part of the alphabet (a common myth is that the alphabet must be recited backwards, however, this is never done during an FST, as many sober people are unable to do this.).
• touch each finger of hand to thumb counting with each touch (1, 2, 3, 4, 4, 3, 2, 1).
• count backwards from a number such as 30 or 100.
• breathe into a "portable or preliminary breath tester" or PBT.

Although most law enforcement agencies continue to use a variety of these FSTs, increasingly a 3-test battery of standardized field sobriety tests (SFSTs) is being adopted. These tests are recommended by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) after studies indicated other FSTs were relatively unreliable. The NHTSA-approved battery of tests consists of the horizontal gaze nystagmus test, the walk-and-turn test, and the one-leg-stand. In some states, such as Ohio, only the standardized tests will be admitted into evidence, provided they were administered and objectively scored "in substantial compliance" with NHTSA standards (ORC 4511.19(D)(4)(b)).^[15]

FSTs are more effective at determining the level of impairment than they are at estimating the driver's blood alcohol concentration (BAC). However, studies question whether the tests increase the officer's ability to judge either. In 1991, Dr. Spurgeon Cole of Clemson University conducted a study on the accuracy of FSTs. His staff videotaped individuals performing six common field sobriety tests, then showed the tapes to 14 police officers and asked them to decide whether the suspects had "had too much to drink and drive". The blood-alcohol concentration of each of the 21 DUI subjects was .00, unknown to the officers. The result: the officers gave their opinion that 46% of these innocent people were too drunk to be able to drive. This study showed the possible inaccuracy of FSTs.^[16]

An increasingly used field sobriety test involves having the suspect breathe into a small, handheld breath testing device. Called variously a PAS ("preliminary alcohol screening") or PBT ("preliminary breath test"), the units are small, inexpensive versions of their larger, more sophisticated instruments at the police stations, the EBTs ("evidentiary breath test"). Whereas the EBTs usually employ infrared spectroscopy, the PAS units use a relatively simple electrochemical (fuel cell) technology. Their purpose, along with other FSTs, is to assist the officer in determining probable cause for arrest. Although because of their relative inaccuracy they were never intended to be used in court for proving actual blood-alcohol concentration, some courts have begun to admit them as evidence of BAC.

[edit] Probable cause to arrest

If the officer has sufficient probable cause that the suspect has been driving under the influence of alcohol, they will make the arrest, handcuff the suspect and transport them to the police station. En route, the officer may advise them of their Miranda rights and their legal implied consent obligation to submit to an evidentiary chemical test of blood, breath or possibly urine.

Laws relating to what exactly constitutes probable cause vary from state to state. In California it is a refutable presumption that a person with a BAC of .08 or higher is driving under the influence. However, section 23610(a)(2) of the California Vehicle Code states that driving with a BAC between .05 and .08 "shall not give rise to any presumption that the person was or was not under the influence of an alcoholic beverage."^[17]

[edit] Chemical test

At the police station, the arrestee will be offered a chemical test of breath, blood or, much less frequently, urine. Breath test results are usually available immediately; urine and blood samples are sent to a lab for later analysis to determine the BAC or possible presence of drugs.

If the arrestee refuses to submit to chemical testing, they will usually be booked for driving under the influence; there will be no evidence for filing the second charge of driving with .08% blood alcohol content. In some cases the arrestee may be charged with DUI even after passing a breathalyzer test if he or she refuses also to take subsequent urine or blood tests. However, the refusal will carry increased penalties on the driving under the influence charge (typically a longer license suspension and/or an increased jail sentence), and the act of refusing may be admissible in court as evidence of "consciousness of guilt". In some states, refusal to submit to a chemical test can result in an automatic suspension of driving privileges, regardless of whether the suspect is convicted of DUI. ^[18] In an increasing number of jurisdictions, if the suspect refuses to take a chemical test the police in some states may restrain the individual and forcefully withdraw blood. ^[19] This is particularly common in situations involving an accident with injury or death. In some jurisdictions this may require obtaining a warrant from a judge. Some commentators, such as Brown University's Jacob Appel, have criticized the role of medical personnel in this process. According to Appel, "If physicians acquiesce today in the removal of a resistant patient's blood, soon they may be called upon to pump the contents of an unwilling patient's stomach or even to perform involuntary surgery to retrieve an evidential bullet."^[20]

While chemical tests are used to determine the driver's BAC, they do not determine the driver's level of impairment. However, state laws usually provide for a rebuttable legal presumption of intoxication at blood alcohol levels of .08 or higher (see blood alcohol test assumptions).

Breath and urine tests can only estimate the BAC at the time the test is taken, which can be different than when the vehicle was actually operated.^[21]

[edit] Booking and charging

If it is determined after arrest that the person's blood alcohol concentration is not at or above the legal limit of .08, they will probably be released without any charges. One may, however, still be charged with driving under the influence of alcohol on the basis of driving symptoms, observed impairment, admissions and/or performance on the field sobriety tests. And if there is suspicion of drug usage, a blood or urine test is likely, or at least the testimony of a specially-trained officer called a Drug Recognition Expert (DRE). Assuming sufficient evidence of impaired driving from drugs, the arrested may face charges of driving under the influence of drugs or the combined influence of alcohol and drugs.

Most of the time, the driver will either be kept in a holding cell (sometimes referred to as the "drunk tank") until they are deemed sober enough to be released on bail or on his "own recognizance" ("O.R."). A date to appear in court for an arraignment will be given to them. If they cannot make bail or is not granted O.R., they will be kept in jail to wait for the arraignment on remand.

[edit] Driving While Impaired courts

These innovative courts use substance abuse intervention with hard-core repeat offenders who plead guilty to driving while intoxicated. Those accepted into the diversionary program are required to abstain from alcohol. Some are required to wear a device that monitors and records any levels of alcohol detected in their bloodstreams.

[edit] SR-22

An SR-22 is an administrative form that attests to an insurance company's coverage, or the posting of a personal public bond in the amount of the state's minimum liability coverage for the licensed driver/ or vehicle registration. SR-22s are typically filed with the respective State's DMV, and in some States must be carried by the licensed driver, or in the registered vehicle (particularly if the licensee has been cited for coverage lapses, DUI or other administrative infractions). SR-22s may attest coverage for a vehicle regardless of operator (owner liability coverage), or cover a specific person regardless of the specific vehicle operated (operator liability coverage).

The form is required in 49 States and the US District of Columbia in order to register a vehicle for usage on public roads (with the notable exception being New Hampshire). It is also required to redeem a license which has been suspended due to coverage lapse in these required States. These States also, generally, require that the issuing insurance company provide the relevant State's DMV with timely updates as to the status of such coverage. (e.g. expiration/cancellations) ^[22][23]

[edit] Interventions

Drunk driving is a public health concern in the United States, and reducing its frequency may require an integrated community-based approach utilizing sanctions and treatments.^[24] Several intervention programs have been developed, such as the Paradigm Developmental Model of Treatment (PDMT), a program encouraging a paradigm shift in the offender's view of oneself and the world.^[25]

[edit] International Comparisons

In countries such as the United Kingdom and Australia drunk driving, and deaths caused by drunk driving are considerably lower than the USA, yet alcohol consumption per capita is higher and the legal age for drinking lower. Research in the United Kingdom has shown that the danger group for drunk driving is young men in their early 20's rather than teenagers.^[26] It is not uncommon for police forces in Australia to randomly stop motorists and submit them to a Random Breath Test. This test involves speaking or blowing into a hand held device to give a reading. Refusing a roadside test is an offense, and is subject to the same penalty as a high range drink driving penalty.

Unlike the USA these countries do not see restricting access to alcohol as having any useful role to play in reducing drunk driving, and their lower drink drive deaths would seem to bear this out. Their experience is that random breath tests, severe penalties, including imprisonment for a first offense, combined with blanket public service broadcasting are the most effective strategy.^[27]

It's notable that anti-drink driving adverts in Australia and the UK do not attempt to stigmatize drinking, in fact they make the point that it is a normal social activity - its when you mix it with driving that it becomes a problem.,^[28][29]

Australian and British Law also does not recognize the crime of DUI Manslaughter and sentences for causing death by drunk driving much lower than the USA, conversely imprisonment for a first offense is not uncommon.^[30]

[edit] See also

• Driving under the influence (mostly for issues that are not U.S.-specific)
• Carrollton bus disaster, about a 1988 bus accident in Kentucky caused by a drunk driver that resulted in 27 deaths
• Blood Alcohol Content
• Jacqueline Saburido
• John E. Sweeney

[edit] References

v • d • e Traffic law Regulations All-way stop · Boulevard rule · Move Over Law · Overtaking · Right- and left-hand traffic · Right-of-way · Right turn on red · School bus traffic stop laws · Traffic code · Epilepsy and driving Enforcement Highway patrol · Parking enforcement · Red light camera · Speed trap · Traffic enforcement camera · Traffic stop · Traffic ticket Speed limit Advisory speed limit · National Maximum Speed Law · School zone · Speed limits by country · Australia · United States Moving violation Reckless driving · Tailgating Licensing Commercial driver's license · Graduated driver licensing · Graduated Licensing · Inter-American Driving Permit · International Driving Permit · Learner's permit · Point system Licensing by country Australia · Brazil · Canada · China · Cyprus · Denmark · Europe · Finland · India · Iran · Ireland · Israel · Japan · Malaysia · Netherlands · New Zealand · Norway · Pakistan · Philippines · Romania · Russia · Singapore · South Africa · Sweden · Taiwan · United Kingdom · United States Reciprocity Commercial Driver's License Information System · Driver License Agreement · Driver License Compact · Non-Resident Violator Compact Seat belt laws Click It or Ticket Driving under the influence By country: Canada · United Kingdom · United States Distractions Mobile phones · Texting while driving · Children Time limits Drivers' working hours (Europe)  · Hours of service (USA) Parking Alternate-side parking · Decriminalised parking enforcement · Double parking · Parking violation