Literature DB >> 15276922

Sobriety checkpoints: evidence of effectiveness is strong, but use is limited.

James C Fell1, John H Lacey, Robert B Voas.   

Abstract

There is substantial and consistent evidence from research that highly publicized, highly visible, and frequent sobriety checkpoints in the United States reduce impaired driving fatal crashes by 18% to 24%. Although checkpoints are not conducted in 13 states for legal or policy reasons, there is strong evidence that if conducted appropriately, checkpoints would save lives in the other states. However, a recent survey of checkpoint use has demonstrated that despite the efforts of the U.S. Department of Transportation to encourage checkpoint use through publications, providing funds for equipment, and for officer overtime expenses, only about a dozen of the 37 states that conduct checkpoints do so on a weekly basis. The survey found that lack of local police resources and funding, lack of support by task forces and citizen activists, and the perception that checkpoints are not productive or cost effective are the main reasons for their infrequent use. This article discusses each of these problems and suggests a method for local communities to implement checkpoints without depending on state or federal funds. Low-staffing sobriety checkpoints conducted by as few as three to five officers have been shown to be just as effective as checkpoints conducted by 15 or more officers. A modified sobriety checkpoint program using passive alcohol sensors ("PASpoints") can be implemented by small- to moderate-sized communities in the United States to deter impaired driving. If implemented in a majority of communities, this strategy has a potential level of effectiveness similar to the high level achieved by several Australian states in their random breath-test (RBT) programs. The PASpoint system calls for a small group of three to five officers on traffic patrol duty to converge on a preset site and conduct a mini-checkpoint, returning to their standard patrol duties within two hours. Within this framework, the PASpoint operation would become a standard driving under the influence (DUI) enforcement technique regularly used within the community's jurisdiction. As a standard traffic enforcement activity, the cost would be covered by the normal enforcement budget.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15276922     DOI: 10.1080/15389580490465247

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Traffic Inj Prev        ISSN: 1538-9588            Impact factor:   1.491


  16 in total

1.  An Evaluation of Three Intensive Supervision Programs for Serious DWI Offenders.

Authors:  Connie H Wiliszowski; James C Fell; A Scott McKnight; A Scott Tippetts; J Decarlo Ciccel
Journal:  Ann Adv Automot Med       Date:  2010

2.  Effects on alcohol related fatal crashes of a community based initiative to increase substance abuse treatment and reduce alcohol availability.

Authors:  R W Hingson; R C Zakocs; T Heeren; M R Winter; D Rosenbloom; W DeJong
Journal:  Inj Prev       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 2.399

3.  Evaluation of four state impaired driving enforcement demonstration programs: Georgia, Tennessee, Pennsylvania and Louisiana.

Authors:  James C Fell; Elizabeth A Langston; A Scott Tippetts
Journal:  Annu Proc Assoc Adv Automot Med       Date:  2005

4.  Evaluation of the use and benefit of passive alcohol sensors during routine traffic stops.

Authors:  J C Fell; C Compton
Journal:  Annu Proc Assoc Adv Automot Med       Date:  2007

5.  Alcohol Policies and Alcohol-Related Motor Vehicle Crash Fatalities Among Young People in the US.

Authors:  Scott E Hadland; Ziming Xuan; Vishnudas Sarda; Jason Blanchette; Monica H Swahn; Timothy C Heeren; Robert B Voas; Timothy S Naimi
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2017-02-13       Impact factor: 7.124

6.  Trends in alcohol-related traffic risk behaviors among college students.

Authors:  Kenneth H Beck; Sarah J Kasperski; Kimberly M Caldeira; Kathryn B Vincent; Kevin E O'Grady; Amelia M Arria
Journal:  Alcohol Clin Exp Res       Date:  2010-06-01       Impact factor: 3.455

7.  Replication of a Controlled Community Prevention Trial: Results From a Local Implementation of Science-Based Intervention to Reduce Impaired Driving.

Authors:  Michael D George; Harold D Holder; Paul N McKenzie; Heather R Mueller; Donna C Herchek; Barry S Faile
Journal:  J Prim Prev       Date:  2018-02

8.  Fatal traffic crashes involving drinking drivers: what have we learned?

Authors:  James C Fell; A Scott Tippetts; Robert B Voas
Journal:  Ann Adv Automot Med       Date:  2009-10

9.  A note on the use of passive alcohol sensors during routine traffic stops.

Authors:  James C Fell; Christine Compton; Robert B Voas
Journal:  Traffic Inj Prev       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 1.491

10.  Injunctive peer misperceptions and the mediation of self-approval on risk for driving after drinking among college students.

Authors:  Shannon R Kenney; Joseph W LaBrie; Andrew Lac
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2013-02-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.