October 27, 2015

Participant Manual SFST - Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course

Participant Manual SFST - Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
Session 2
Detection and
General
Deterrence
2-1
50 Minutes
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 2 of 39
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
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
Learning Objectives
2-2
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
CONTENT SEGMENTS LEARNING ACTIVITIES
A. The DWI Problem Instructor Led Presentations
B. The Concept of General Deterrence Video Presentation
C. Relating Detection to Deterrence Potential Reading Assignments
D. Evidence of Effective Detection and
Effective Deterrence
E. Physiology of Alcohol
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 3 of 39
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
The DWI Problem
2-3
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
A. The DWI Problem (Local, State and National)
How Widespread Is DWI?
While not all of those who 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 limits.
Prior to 1994, nearly half of the drivers who died in crashes had been drinking.
Each year, tens of thousands of people die in traffic crashes. Throughout the nation,
alcohol is the major contributor to traffic fatalities. In 2010, there were 10,228 alcohol
related fatalities representing 31 % of all traffic fatalities. (NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts;
2010 Motor Vehicle Crashes: Overview, DOT HS 811 552, February 2012.)
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
The DWI Problem (Cont.)
2-4
05 06 07 08 09 10 11
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
Traffic Deaths
Average
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:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 4 of 39
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
8.8 million people admitted driving over the
legal limit in past 12 months
Drivers with BAC 0.08 or Above
2-5
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
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
What number of drivers commit this
violation?
National Statistics
2-6
Weekend Nights – 10 percent or
More
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?
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 5 of 39
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
Drives intoxicated 80 times/year
Once every four or five nights
Some every day
Average DWI Violator
2-7
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.
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 6 of 39
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
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
DWI Problem
2-8
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.
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 7 of 39
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
Alcohol Related Crash Fatalities
2-9
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
• 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.
Source: NHTSA Traffic Safety Facts, 2010 Data, DOT HS 811 606, April 2012.
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
Alcohol Facts
2-10
Drivers with a BAC of .08 or higher
accounted for 65 percent of the fatalities:
17 percent were passengers riding with
the driver with a BAC of .08 or higher
11 percent of fatalities were occupants of
other vehicles
7 percent were persons not in vehicles
• 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.
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 8 of 39
Source: NHTSA Traffic Safety Facts, 2010 Data, DOT HS 811 606, April 2012.
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
Alcohol Facts (Cont.)
2-11
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
• 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
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
Alcohol Facts (Cont.)
2-12
• 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.
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 9 of 39
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
Alcohol Facts (Cont.)
2-13
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
• 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:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 10 of 39
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
The fear of arrest
General Deterrence
2-14
B. Concept of General Deterrence
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.
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 11 of 39
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
There is no reason to fear arrest
General Deterrence (Cont.)
2-15
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
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
Citations issued to violators later found to have
BACs between 0.10 and 0.20.
Ft. Lauderdale BAC Study
2-16
Other Violations
78 percent
DWI
22 percent
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.
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 12 of 39
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
For every DWI violator arrested…
Ft. Lauderdale BAC Study (Cont.)
2-17
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
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
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
The Ultimate Goal:
Changing Behavior
2-18
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.
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 13 of 39
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
Prevention
Deterrence
Two Approaches
2-19
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.
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 14 of 39
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
Promote positive attitudes
DWI is wrong
No one has the right to endanger others
DWI cannot be tolerated or condoned
Prevention
2-20
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.
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 15 of 39
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
Driving public's fear of being arrested
Enough violators must be arrested to
convince public they will get caught
Deterrence
2-21
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.
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
Driving public's fear of being arrested
Enough violators must be arrested to
convince public they will get caught
Deterrence (Cont.)
2-22
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.
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 16 of 39
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
Fear long term costs and inconvenience
The Fear of Being
Caught and Punished
2-23
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.
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 17 of 39
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
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
Specific Deterrence
2-24
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.
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 18 of 39
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
Supportive roles: Legislators,
Prosecutors, Judiciary, and Media
Specific Deterrence (Cont.)
2-25
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
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
For every DWI violator arrested, there are
between 500 and 2,000 undetected DWI
violations
How Much Deterrence is Enough?
2-26
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.
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 19 of 39
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
Does the average DWI violator fear
arrest?
Should they be afraid?
Intense publicity may enhance the
perceived risk
How Great is the Risk?
2-27
How Great is the Risk?
Sometimes, it is possible to enhance the perceived risk, at least for a while, through
intensive publicity. However, media "hype" without intensified enforcement has never
been enough to maintain the fear of arrest for very long.
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
Annual DWI arrests, in most places,
equal about one percent of the number of
drivers in the population
Annual DWI arrests equal about one
percent of drivers in the population
The average violator commits DWI 80
times each year
How Much Should the Public Fear?
2-28
How Much Should the Public Fear?
We can draw some reasonable estimates of DWI enforcement intensity, based on what
we know and on certain assumptions we have already made. Suppose we deal with a
random sample of 100 Americans of driving age. If they come from typical enforcement
jurisdictions, chances are that exactly one of them will be arrested for DWI in any given
year: our annual DWI arrests, in most places, equal about one percent of the number of
drivers in the population. That is one arrest out of 100 drivers during one year;
however, how many DWI violations do those drivers commit? Recall our previous
estimates that some 25 % of America's drivers at least occasionally drive while under
the influence, and that the average violator commits DWI 80 times each year. Then, our
sample of 100 drivers includes 25 DWI violators who collectively are responsible for
2,000 DWI violations yearly.
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 20 of 39
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
Arrest enough violators to convince
many of them it can happen to them
As arrest rate increases, odds are that it
will happen to them eventually
Changing the Odds
2-29
Changing the Odds
If an arrest/violation ratio of 1 in 2,000 is not enough to make deterrence work, is it then
reasonable to think that we can ever make deterrence work? After all, if we doubled
DWI arrests to 1 in 1,000, we would still be missing 999 violators for every one we
managed to catch. If we increased arrests ten fold, to 1 in 200, 199 would escape for
every one arrested. How much deterrence would that produce?
Surprisingly, it would probably produce quite a bit. We don't have to arrest every DWI
offender every time in order to convince them that they have something to fear. We only
have to arrest enough of them enough of the time to convince many of them that it can
happen to them. As the arrest rate increases, the odds are that it will happen to them
eventually. The law of averages (or cumulative probability) will catch up with them, and
sooner than we might at first expect.
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 21 of 39
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
Percent of Violators Arrested
After…
2-30
Nightly Arrest
Rate
One Year Two Years Three Years
1 in 2000 3.9
percent
7.7
percent
11.3
percent
1 in 1000 7.7
percent
14.8
percent
21.3
percent
1 in 500 14.8
percent
27.4
percent
38.2
percent
1 in 20 33.0
percent
55.2
percent
70.0
percent
The statistics on the chart display the cumulative probability (as a percentage) of being
arrested at least once during the course of one, two or three years as a function of the
arrest rate on any given night. These statistics are based on the assumption that the
average violator commits DWI 80 times each year.
Clearly, the chances of being caught accumulate very quickly as the arrest/violation
ratio increases. If we could maintain a ratio of one arrest in every 500 violations (a level
of enforcement currently maintained in some jurisdictions), then by the time one year
has passed, slightly more than one of every seven people (14.8 %) who have
committed DWI during that year will have been arrested at least once. It probably is a
high enough chance to get the attention -- and fear -- of many violators. If we could
achieve an arrest ratio of 1 in 200 (a level attainable by officers skilled in DWI detection)
we will arrest fully one third of all DWI violators at least once every year and we will
arrest more than half of them by the time two years have gone by.
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
Realistic increase in DWI enforcement
activity will induce a significant degree of
general deterrence and a corresponding
change in DWI behavior
Can it be Done? Will it Work?
2-31
D. Evidence of Effective Detection and Effective Deterrence
Can it Be Done, and Will it Work?
Is there any evidence that a practical and realistic increase in DWI enforcement activity
will induce a significant degree of general deterrence and a corresponding change in
DWI behavior? Yes there is.
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 22 of 39
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
1975: Arrest/violation ratio of 1 in 2000
or less, 9 percent of weekend drivers
were operating with BAC of 0.10 or
higher
1976 -1979: Intensive DWI enforcement
on weekends nights
Officers intensively trained,
enforcement publicized, justice
community coordinated
Stockton, California
3 Year Intensive Weekend DWI Enforcement
2-32
Several enforcement programs have succeeded in achieving significant DWI
deterrence. Consider, for example, the three year intensive weekend DWI enforcement
program in Stockton, California.
As early as 1975, a study showed that the city's total number of DWI arrests (700) were
considerably less than one percent of the areas licensed number of drivers (130,000).
The implication here was that Stockton police were only maintaining the arrest/violation
ration of 1:2,000, or less. In addition, roadside surveys on Friday and Saturday nights
disclosed that nine percent of the drivers were operating with BAC's of 0.10 or higher.
Then things changed. Beginning in 1976 and continuing at planned intervals through
the first half of 1979, Stockton police conducted intensive DWI enforcement on weekend
nights. The officers involved were extensively trained. The enforcement effort was
heavily publicized and additional equipment (PBTs and cassette recorders) was made
available. The police effort was closely coordinated with the District Attorney's office, the
County Probation office, and other allied criminal justice and safety organizations.
Session 2 – Detection and General Deterrence
Standardized Field Sobriety Test Course
Arrests increased 500 percent
Weekend nighttime crashes decreased
34 percent
Proportion of nighttime, weekend drivers
legally under the influence dropped from
9 percent to 6 percent
For every DWI arrest, three others are
contacted by police officers but NOT
arrested for DWI
Stockton, California (Cont.)
2-33
All this paid off. By the time the project came to a close (in 1979) DWI arrests had
increased by over 500 %, and weekend nighttime collisions had decreased by 34 %,
and the number of operators committing DWI dropped one third.
The implication of this study, and of other similar studies, is that for every DWI violator
actually arrested for DWI, three others are contacted by police officers, but are not
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Notes:_______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
HS 178 R5/13 23 of 39
arrested for DWI. It is clear that significant improvement in the arrest rate could be
achieved if officers were more skilled at DWI detection.Source: DWI Detection and
Standardized Field
Sobriety Testing

March 2013 Edition

No comments: