Participant Manual SFST -Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence DWI Detection and Standardized Field Sobriety Testing

Participant Manual SFST -Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence  DWI Detection and Standardized Field Sobriety Testing

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence 

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

Learning Objectives 

• • Describe frequency of DWI violations and crashes 
• • Define general deterrence 
• • Describe relationship between detection and general deterrence 
• • Describe a brief history of alcohol 
• • Identify common types of alcohol 
• • Describe physiologic processes of alcohol absorption, distribution, and elimination 

22

Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course 

Learning Objectives 

At the conclusion of this session, participants will be able to: 

• • Describe the frequency of DWI violations and crashes 
• • Define general deterrence 
• • Describe the relationship between detection and general deterrence 
• • Describe a brief history of alcohol 
• • Identify common types of alcohol 
• • Describe the physiologic processes of absorption, distribution, and elimination of alcohol in the body 
• • The DWI Problem Instructor Led Presentations 
• • The Concept of General Deterrence Video Presentation 
• • Relating Detection to Deterrence Potential Reading Assignments 
• • Evidence of Effective Detection and Effective Deterrence 
• • Physiology of Alcohol 

CONTENT SEGMENTS LEARNING ACTIVITIES 

Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence 

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

The DWI Problem 

• • Prior to 1994, nearly half of the drivers who died in crashes had been drinking 
• • In 2010 – 10,228 alcohol related fatalities represented 31 percent of all traffic fatalities 

23

Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course 

A. The DWI Problem (Local, State and National) 

How Widespread Is DWI? 

While not all of those ho drive after drinking have a BAC of 0.08 or more, the presumptive or illegal per se limit for DWI in all states, some drivers do have BACs in excess of these limit 

Prior to 1994, nearly

 drivers who died in crashes had been drinking. 

Each year, tens of th ands of people die in traffic crashes. Throughout the nation, alcohol is the major c 

to traffic fatalities. In 2010, there were 10,228 alcohol 

related fatalities repr enting 31 % of all traffic fatalities. (NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts; 

2010 Motor Vehicle C ashes Overview, DOT HS 811 552, February 2012.) 

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

The DWI Proble 

eaths 

Impaired drivers are more likely than other drivers to take excessive risks such as speeding or turning abruptly.  Impaired drivers also are more likely than other drivers to have slowed reaction times. They may not be able to react quickly enough to slow down before crashing and are less likely to wear seatbelts. On the average, two percent of drivers on the road at any given time are DWI. DWI violations and crashes are not simply the work of a relatively few "problem drinkers" or "problem drug users." Many people commit DWI, at least occasionally. 

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

Estimates indicate that nationwide about 8.8 million persons 16 and over, self-reported that they drove over the legal limit in the past 12 months. 

It is also estimated that 1 in 88 drivers over the legal limit was arrested for DWI. 

Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence 

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

National Statistics 

What number of drivers commit this 

Weekend Nights – 10 percent or More 

26

Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course 

A frequently quoted, and often misinterpreted, statistic places the average incidence of DWI at one driver in fifty. Averaged across all hours of the day and all days of the week, two percent of the drivers on the road are DWI. The 1 in 50 figure is offered as evidence that a relatively small segment of America's drivers, the so called "problem" group, account for the majority of traffic deaths. There's nothing wrong with that figure as a statistical average, but police officers know that at certain times and places many more than two percent of drivers are impaired. NHTSA research suggests that during the late night, weekend hours, as many as 10 % of drivers on the roads may be DWI. On certain holiday weekends, and other critical times, the figure may go even higher. 

How Many?  How Often? 

The issue of how many DWIs are on the road at any given time is an important factor in measuring the magnitude of the problem. However, from an overall traffic safety perspective, the more important issue may be the number of drivers who ever commit DWI. Just how widespread is this violation? 

Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence 

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

Average DWI Violator 

It is conservatively estimated that the typical DWI violator commits that offense about 80 times per year. In other words, the average DWI violator drives while under the influence once every four or five nights. 

Clearly, it is more than one in fifty. Although it may be true that, on the average, two percent of drivers are DWI at any given time, it certainly is not the same two percent every time. It is even more than one in ten. Not everyone who commits DWI is out on the road impaired every Friday and Saturday night.  Some of them, at least, must skip an occasional weekend. Thus, the 10 % who show up, weekend after weekend, in the Friday and Saturday statistics must come from a larger pool of violators, each of whom "contributes" to the statistics on some nights, but not necessarily on all nights. 

An analysis of BAC roadside survey data suggests that the average DWI violator commits the violation approximately 80 times each year. Undoubtedly, there are some who drive impaired virtually every day; others commit the violation less often. It is likely that at least one quarter of all American motorists drive while impaired at least once in their lives. That figure falls approximately midway between the 55 % of drivers who at least occasionally drive after drinking and the 10 % of weekend, nighttime drivers who have BACs above the so called legal limit. 

Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence 

DWI Problem 

• • Far more than 2 percent of drivers contribute to DWI problem 
• • Crime committed by a substantial segment of Americans 
• • Can be fought through societal approach  

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

28

Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course 

These estimates include everyone who drives impaired every day, as well as everyone who commits the violation just once and never offends again; and it includes everyone in between. In short, it includes everyone who ever runs the risk of being involved in a crash while impaired. 

Society's Problem and the Solution 

The fact is that far more than two percent of American drivers actively contribute to the DWI problem. DWI is a crime committed by a substantial segment of Americans. It has been and remains a popular crime; one that many people from all walks and stations of life commit. DWI is a crime that can be fought successfully only through a societal approach of comprehensive community based programs. 

Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence 

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

Alcohol Related Crash Fatalities 

• • 31 percent of all fatal crashes on weekends alcohol-impaired. 
• • Alcohol impaired drivers involved in fatal crashes were 4 times higher at night 
• • 1.41 million drivers were arrested for DWI in 2010 
• • Average one fatality every 51 minutes 
• • Cost society approximately $54 billion 
• • Lost productivity, medical expenses, property damages, and other related expenditures 

29

Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course 

• • 31 percent of all fatal crashes on weekends alcohol-impaired. 
• • Alcohol impaired drivers involved in fatal crashes were 4 times higher at night. 
• • 1.41 million drivers were arrested for DWI in 2010. 
• • These alcohol related fatalities represent an average of one alcohol related fatality every 51 minutes. 
• • Based on the most current cost data available, these alcohol related fatalities cost society approximately $54 billion in lost productivity, medical expenses, property damages, and other related expenditures. 
• • In 2010, 11,773 lives were lost in alcohol impaired crashes representing 32 percent of the total motor vehicle fatalities in the U.S. 
• • Drivers with a BAC of .08 or higher accounted for 65 percent of the fatalities, 17 percent were passengers riding with a driver with a BAC of .08 or higher, 11 percent of these fatalities were occupants of other vehicles, and 7 percent were persons not in vehicles. 

Source: NHTSA Traffic Safety Facts, 2010 Data, DOT HS 811 606, April 2012. 

Source: NHTSA Traffic Safety Facts, 2010 Data, DOT HS 811 606, April 2012. 

Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence 

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

Alcohol Facts (Cont.) 

• • In 2010, 10,395 lives were lost in speed related crashes 
• • 42 percent of all drivers with a BAC of .08 or higher, involved in fatal crashes, were speeding 
• • In 2010, between midnight and 3:00 a.m., 72 percent of speeding drivers involved in fatal crashes had a BAC of .08 or higher 

2 11

Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course 

• • In 2010, 10,395 lives were lost in speed related crashes. 
• • 42 percent of all drivers with a BAC of .08 or higher, involved in fatal crashes, were speeding. 
• • In 2010, between midnight and 3:00 a.m., 72 percent of speeding drivers involved in fatal crashes had a BAC of .08 or higher. 

Source: NHTSA Traffic Safety Facts, 2010 Data, DOT HS 811, 636, August 2012. 

Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence 

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

Alcohol Facts (Cont.) 

• • The rate of alcohol impairment for drivers involved in fatal crashes was four times higher at night than during the day 
• • Drivers with a BAC of .08 or higher who were involved in fatal crashes were eight times more likely to have a prior conviction for driving while impaired as compared to drivers involved in fatal 

crashes with no alcohol involvement 

2 12

Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course 

• • The rate of alcohol impairment for drivers involved in fatal crashes was four times higher at night than during the day. 
• • Drivers with a BAC of .08 or higher who were involved in fatal crashes were eight times more likely to have a prior conviction for driving while impaired as compared to drivers involved in fatal crashes with no alcohol involvement. 

Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence 

Alcohol Facts (Cont.) 

• • In 2010, 6,652 drivers involved in fatal crashes had a BAC of .15 or higher 
• • Males account for 70 percent of all traffic fatalities 
• • In 2010, the fatal crash involvement rate per 100,000 population was almost three times higher for male drivers than for females 

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

2 13

Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course 

• • In 2010, 6,652 drivers involved in fatal crashes had a BAC of .15 or higher. 
• • Males account for 70 percent of all traffic fatalities. 
• • In 2010, the fatal crash involvement rate per 100,000 population was almost three times higher for male drivers than for females. 

The fear of arrest is the leading deterrent. 

One approach to reducing the number of drinking drivers is general deterrence of DWI.  General deterrence of DWI is based in the driving public's fear of being arrested. If enough violators come to believe that there is a good chance that they will get caught, at least some of them will stop committing DWI at least some of the time. However, unless there is a real risk of arrest, there will not be much fear of arrest. 

Law enforcement officers must arrest enough violators enough of the time to convince the general public that they will get caught, sooner or later, if they continue to drive while impaired. 

How many DWI violators must be arrested in order to convince the public that there is a real risk of arrest for DWI? 

Several programs have demonstrated that significant deterrence can be achieved by arresting 1 DWI violator for every 400 DWI violations committed. Currently, however, for every 1 DWI violator arrested, there are between 500 and 2,000 DWI violations committed.  

Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence 

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

General Deterrence (Cont.) 

There is no reason to fear arrest 

2 15

Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course 

When the chances of being arrested are one in two thousand, the average DWI violator really has little to fear. 

There are three noteworthy reasons. 

• • DWI violators vastly outnumber police officers. It is not possible to arrest every drinking driver each time they commit DWI. 
• • Some officers are not highly skilled at DWI detection. They fail to recognize and arrest many DWI violators. 
• • Some officers are not motivated to detect and arrest DWI violators. 

Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence 

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

Ft. Lauderdale BAC Study 

DWI 22 percent 

Other Violations 

78 percent 

Citations issued to violators later found to have BACs between 0.10 and 0.20. 

2 16

Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course 

Significant Findings 

In a 1975 study conducted in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, only 22 percent of traffic violators who were stopped with BACs between 0.10 and 0.20 were arrested for DWI. The remainder were cited for other violations, even though they were legally impaired. In this study breath tests were administered to the violators by researchers after the police officers had completed their investigations. The officers failed to detect 78 percent of the DWI violators they investigated. 

Police officers sometimes fail to recognize and arrest a DWI violator. Ft. Lauderdale (Florida) BAC study (1975): only 22 % of traffic violators with BACs between 0.10 and 

0.20 were arrested for DWI. 

Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence 

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

Ft. Lauderdale BAC Study (Cont.) 

For every DWI violator arrested… 

2 17

Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course 

Implication: For every DWI violator actually arrested three others are contacted by police officers, face to face, but are released without arrest. 

Significant improvement in arrest rate could be achieved if officers were more skilled at DWI detection. 

Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence 

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

The Ultimate Goal: 

Changing Behavior 

The goal is to encourage more Americans to: 

• • Avoid committing DWI 
• • Control drinking prior to driving 
• • Select alternative transportation 
• • Avoid riding with impaired drivers 
• • Recognize impaired driving is unacceptable behavior at all levels 

2 18

Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course 

The Solutions 

The Ultimate Goal: Changing Behavior 

What must the comprehensive community based DWI programs seek to accomplish? 

Ultimately, nothing less than fundamental behavioral change, on a widespread basis. The goal is to encourage more Americans to: 

• • Avoid committing DWI, either by avoiding or controlling drinking prior to driving or by selecting alternative transportation. 
• • Intervene actively to prevent others from committing DWI (for example, putting into practice the theme "friends don't let friends drive drunk") 
• • Avoid riding with drivers who are impaired. 

The final test of the value of DWI countermeasures on the national, state and local levels is whether they succeed in getting significantly more people to modify their behavior. The programs also pursue other more immediate objectives that support or reinforce the ultimate goal.  However, the ultimate goal is to change driving while impaired to an unacceptable form of behavior at all levels. 

Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence 

Two Approaches 

• • Prevention 
• • Deterrence 

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

2 19

Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course 

Pursuing the Goal: Two Approaches 

How can we bring about these changes in behavior?  How can we discourage impaired driving, prevent others from drinking and driving, and avoid becoming passive "statistics" by refusing to ride with drinking drivers? 

Basically, there are two general approaches that must be taken to achieve this goal. 

One: prevention --gives promise of the ultimate, lasting solution to the DWI problem; but it will require a substantial amount of time to mature fully. 

Two: deterrence --only offers a partial or limited solution, but it is available right now. 

Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence 

Prevention 

• • Promote positive attitudes 
• • DWI is wrong 
• • No one has the right to endanger others 
• • DWI cannot be tolerated or condoned 

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

2 20

Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course 

Prevention: the Ultimate Solution 

DWI countermeasures that strive for the ultimate achievement of drinking and driving behavioral changes have been grouped under the label "Prevention." There are many kinds of DWI preventive activities.  Some are carried out by and in our schools, some through the mass media, some through concerned civic groups, and so forth. The various preventive efforts focus on different specific behaviors and address different target groups. 

However, they seek to change drinking and driving behavior by promoting more positive attitudes and by fostering a set of values that reflects individual responsibilities toward drinking and driving. 

Preventive countermeasures seek society's acceptance of the fact that DWI is wrong. Some people believe that drinking and driving is strictly an individual's personal business; that it is up to each person to decide whether or not to accept the risk of driving after drinking. Preventive activities try to dispel that outmoded and irresponsible belief. Instead, they promote the idea that no one has the right to endanger others by drinking and driving, or to risk becoming a burden (economically and otherwise) to others as a result of injuries suffered while drinking and driving. Realistically, everyone has an obligation not only to control their own drinking and driving, but also to speak up when others are about to commit the violation. Only when all of society views DWI as a negative behavior that cannot be tolerated or condoned, will the public's behavior begin to change. That is the long term solution. 

Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence 

Deterrence 

• • Driving public's fear of being arrested 
• • Enough violators must be arrested to convince public they will get caught 

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

2 21

Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course 

General deterrence of DWI is based on the driving public's fear of being arrested. If enough violators come to believe that there is a good chance that they will get caught, some of them (at least) will stop committing DWI at least some of the time. 

Unless there is a real risk of being arrested, there will not be much fear of arrest. 

Law enforcement must arrest enough violators to convince the public that they will get caught, if they continue to drive while impaired. 

2 22

Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course 

C. Relating Detection to Deterrence Potential 

Deterrence: the Interim Solution 

DWI countermeasures that seek a short cut to the ultimate goal of behavioral change usually are labeled "Deterrence." Deterrence can be described as negative reinforcement. Some deterrence countermeasures focus primarily on changing individual drinking and driving behavior while others seek to influence people to intervene into others' drinking and driving decisions. 

The key feature of deterrence is that it strives to change DWI behavior without dealing directly with the prevailing attitudes about the rightness or wrongness of DWI. Deterrence uses a mechanism quite distinct from attitudinal change: fear of apprehension and application of sanctions. 

Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence 

The Fear of Being Caught and Punished 

• Fear long term costs and inconvenience 

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

2 23

Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course 

The Fear of Being Caught and Punished 

Large scale DWI deterrence programs try to control the DWI behavior of the driving public by appealing to the public's presumed fear of being caught. Most actual or potential DWI violators view the prospect of being arrested with extreme distaste. For some, the arrest, with its attendant handcuffing, booking, publicity and other stigmatizing and traumatizing features, is the thing most to be feared. For others, it is the prospective punishment (jail, stiff fine, etc.) that causes most of the concern. Still others fear most the long term costs and inconvenience of a DWI arrest: the license suspension and increased premiums for automobile insurance. For many violators the fear probably is a combination of all of these. Regardless, if enough violators are sufficiently fearful of DWI arrest, some of them will avoid committing the violation at least some of the time. Fear by itself will not change their attitudes; if they do not see anything inherently wrong with drinking and driving in the first place, the prospect of arrest and punishment will not help them see the light. However, fear sometimes can be enough to keep them from putting their anti-social attitudes into practice. This type of DWI deterrence, based on the fear of being caught, is commonly called general deterrence. It applies to the driving public generally and presumably affects the behavior of those who have never been caught. There is an element of fear of the unknown at work here. 

Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence 

Specific Deterrence 

• • Those who have been caught and arrested 
• • Public must perceive that there is an appreciable risk of being caught and convicted 
• • Enforcement creates and sustains fear of being caught 

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

2 24

Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course 

Another type of DWI deterrence, called specific deterrence, applies to those who have been caught and arrested. The typical specific deterrent involves some type of punishment, perhaps a fine, involuntary community service, a jail term or action against the driver's license. The punishment is imposed in the hope that it will convince the specific violator that there is indeed something to fear as a result of being caught, and to emphasize that if there is a next time, the punishment will be even more severe. It is the fear of the known that comes into play in this case. 

The concept of DWI deterrence through fear of apprehension or punishment seems sound. But will it work in actual practice? The crux of the problem is this: If the motoring public is to fear arrest and punishment for DWI, they must perceive that there is an appreciable risk of being caught and convicted if they commit the crime. If actual and potential DWI violators come to believe that the chance of being arrested is minimal, they will quickly lose whatever fear of arrest they may have felt. 

Enforcement is the mechanism for creating and sustaining a fear of being caught for DWI. No specific deterrence program can amount to much, unless police officers arrest large numbers of violators; no punishment or rehabilitation program can affect behavior on a large scale unless it is applied to many people. General deterrence depends on enforcement --the fear of being caught is a direct function of the number of people who are caught. 

Obviously, the police alone cannot do the job. Legislators must supply laws that the police can enforce. Prosecutors must vigorously prosecute DWI violators, and the judiciary must adjudicate fairly and deliver the punishments prescribed by law. The media must publicize the enforcement effort and communicate the fact that the risk is not worth the probable outcome. Each of these elements plays a supportive role in DWI deterrence. 

Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence 

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

How Much Deterrence is Enough? 

For every DWI violator arrested, there are between 500 and 2,000 undetected DWI violations 

2 26

Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course 

How much deterrence is enough? 

Estimates from around the country:  For every DWI violator arrested, there are between 500 and 2,000 undetected DWI violations. 

Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence 

Notes:_______________________________________________ 

How Great is the Risk? 

• • Does the average DWI violator fear arrest? 
• • Should they be afraid? 
• • Intense publicity may enhance the perceived risk