Controlling Impaired Driving Through Vehicle Programs: An Overview

The growing recognition of the problem presented by illicit vehicle operation by those whose license has been suspended for driving while intoxicated (DWI) has led to the increasing use of vehicle sanctions. These sanctions include vehicle impoundment and forfeiture, vehicle registration cancellation, and vehicle interlocks as penalties for DWI and driving while suspended (DWS). This article reviews the current information available on the use and effectiveness of vehicle sanctions for reducing offender recidivism. In the United States, 14 states have impoundment laws that are widely used as sanctions for both DWI and DWS, with the length of the impoundment increasing with the number of previous offenses. These laws have been shown to reduce recidivism while the vehicle is in custody and, to a lesser extent, even after the vehicle has been released. Vehicle impoundment is also widely used in Canada and New Zealand. Although a larger number of U.S. states have laws providing for vehicle forfeiture for DWI or DWS, this sanction tends to be limited to multiple offenders and therefore impacts fewer drivers. Cancellation of the vehicle registration and the confiscation of the vehicle plates are increasing in popularity because the vehicle tags are the property of the state, rather than the vehicle owner. Vehicle alcohol interlocks have proven to be an effective method for reducing DWI offender recidivism while they are on the car, but appear to produce only limited post-treatment behavior change. Interlocks are widely used in the United States and Canada and are beginning to be implemented in Europe and Australia. The issues that arise in implementing vehicle sanction programs are discussed and the actions taken by states to deal with them are described.

[1]  D J Beirness,et al.  DEALING WITH THE HARD CORE DRINKING DRIVER , 1996 .

[2]  P R Marques,et al.  The Alberta Interlock Program: the evaluation of a province-wide program on DUI recidivism. , 1999, Addiction.

[3]  R B Voas,et al.  Evaluation of a method for reducing unlicensed driving: the Washington and Oregon license plate sticker laws. , 1997, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[4]  Hugh Laurence Ross,et al.  LICENSE PLATE IMPOUNDMENT FOR MULTIPLE OFFENDER DRUNK DRIVERS , 1995 .

[5]  R. Bangert-Drowns,et al.  Final results from a meta-analysis of remedial interventions with drink/drive offenders. , 1995, Addiction.

[6]  H L Ross,et al.  Effects of license revocation on drunk-driving offenders. , 1988, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[7]  Robert B Voas,et al.  Barriers to Interlock Implementation , 2003, Traffic injury prevention.

[8]  Robert B. Voas,et al.  CIRCUMVENTING THE ALCOHOL SAFETY INTERLOCK: THE EFFECT OF THE AVAILABILITY OF A NONINTERLOCK VEHICLE , 2000 .

[9]  C. Helander,et al.  1999 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE CALIFORNIA DUI MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM , 1999 .

[10]  Robert B Voas,et al.  Vehicle action: effective policy for controlling drunk and other high-risk drivers? , 2002, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[11]  E Wells-Parker,et al.  IMPACT OF DRIVER'S LICENSE SUSPENSION ON EMPLOYMENT STABILITY OF DRUNKEN DRIVERS , 1987 .

[12]  R B Voas,et al.  Temporary vehicle impoundment in Ohio: a replication and confirmation. , 1998, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[13]  Robert B. Voas,et al.  EFFECTIVENESS OF THE OHIO VEHICLE ACTION AND ADMINISTRATIVE LICENSE SUSPENSION LAWS , 2000 .

[14]  D J Beirness,et al.  THE IMPACT OF ADMINISTRATIVE LICENCE SUSPENSION AND VEHICLE IMPOUNDMENT FOR DWI IN MANITOBA , 1997 .

[15]  R B Voas,et al.  Temporary vehicle immobilization: evaluation of a program in Ohio. , 1997, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[16]  Robert B Voas,et al.  Forfeiture programs in California: why so few? , 2002, Journal of safety research.

[17]  David J. DeYoung,et al.  An Evaluation of the General Deterrent Effect of Vehicle Impoundment on Suspended and Revoked Drivers in California , 2000 .

[18]  A Scott Tippetts,et al.  Comparative and joint prediction of DUI recidivism from alcohol ignition interlock and driver records. , 2003, Journal of studies on alcohol.

[19]  A Scott Tippetts,et al.  Evaluation of a program to motivate impaired driving offenders to install ignition interlocks. , 2002, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[20]  D J Deyoung,et al.  An evaluation of the specific deterrent effects of vehicle impoundment on suspended, revoked, and unlicensed drivers in California. , 1999, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[21]  G. Larkin,et al.  Effectiveness of ignition interlock devices in reducing drunk driving recidivism. , 1999, American journal of preventive medicine.