Drunk driving in the United States
[16] The NHTSA defines fatal collisions as "alcohol-related" if they believe the driver, a passenger, or non-motorist (such as a pedestrian or pedal cyclist) had a blood alcohol content (BAC) of 0.01% or greater.[17] For the most part, DUI or DWI are synonymous terms that represent the criminal offense of operating (or in some jurisdictions merely being in physical control of) a motor vehicle while being under the influence of alcohol or drugs or a combination of both.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.[18] Early laws, such as that enacted in New Jersey, required proof of a state of intoxication with no specific definition of what level of inebriation qualified.[22] Research in the American Economic Review suggests that sanctions imposed at BAC thresholds are effective in reducing repeat drunk driving.[23] On May 14, 2013, the National Transportation Safety Board recommended that all 50 states lower the benchmark for determining when a driver is legally drunk from 0.08 blood-alcohol content to 0.05.The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) regulation prohibits those who hold a commercial driver's license from driving with an alcohol concentration of 0.04 or greater.Some states permit enforcement of DUI, DWI, and OWI/OVI statutes based on "operation and control" of a vehicle, while others require actual "driving".It is a permissive presumption of guilt where the person's BAC is 0.08% or greater (units of milligrams per deciliter, representing 8 g of alcohol in 10 liters of blood).For example, the Union Pacific Railroad imposes a BAC limit of 0.02%,[41] that if, after an on-duty traffic crash, the determination that an employee violated that rule may result in termination of employment with no chance of future rehire.Administrative penalties are imposed by a state agency, and in some cases may apply even if a person stopped for impaired driving is not convicted of the offense.The SR in SR-22 stands for Safety Responsibility, and it is needed to reinstate a suspended driver's license after a DUI conviction in 49 states and the District of Columbia.In some cases, the driver may be penalized if a family member or mechanic disables the IID when not in use by the sanctioned individual, or temporarily for servicing the vehicle.The primary goals are to: According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, police officers should conduct DUI Investigations according to a specific protocol called phases.If the officer observes enough evidence to have a "Reasonable Suspicion" to legally justify a further detention and investigation, they will ask the driver to step out of the vehicle.Examples of "probable cause" for a drunk driving arrest includes: The NHTSA outlines several indicators of impairment, commonly referred to as “impairment cues.” These cues encompass behaviors like tightly gripping the steering wheel, driving with a closely positioned face to the windshield, slouching in the seat, and maintaining a fixed stare straight ahead.The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has developed a model system for managing Standardized Field Sobriety Test (SFST) training.His staff videotaped people 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" (sic).Another distinction is that, while the larger EBTs usually employ infrared spectroscopy, the PEBT and PAS devices use a relatively simple electrochemical (fuel cell) technology.While the tester provides numerical blood alcohol content (BAC) readings, its primary use is for screening and establishing probable cause for arrest, to invoke the implied consent requirements.En route, the officer may advise them of their legal implied consent obligation to submit to an evidentiary chemical test of blood, breath or possibly urine depending on the jurisdiction.However, section 23610(a)(2) of the California Vehicle Code states that driving with a BAC between 0.05% and 0.08% "shall not give rise to any presumption that the person was or was not under the influence of an alcoholic beverage".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.Regarding blood tests, some commentators, such as Brown University's Jacob Appel, have criticized the role of medical personnel in this process.However, state laws usually provide for a rebuttable legal presumption of intoxication at a BAC of 0.08% or higher (see blood alcohol test assumptions).[76] 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.[82] A Canadian study published in 2011 examined 18 years of data on recreational boating, and concluded that a "true figure" of alcohol-related deaths in that country "may lie between 46% and 56%".Unlike the United States, these countries do not see restricting access to alcohol as having any useful role to play in reducing drunk driving.Their experience is that random breath tests, severe penalties, including potential imprisonment for a first offense (in UK), combined with blanket public service broadcasting are a more effective strategy.[92] Also, Australian and British law do not recognize the crime of DUI manslaughter, and sentences for causing death by drunk driving are much lower than the United States.
motor vehiclealcohol consumptionblood alcohol concentrationdriving under the influenceBureau of Justice Statisticsdrunk drivingalcoholNative AmericansNational Highway Traffic Safety Administrationalcohol-relatedtrafficdeathsblood alcohol contentBreathalyzersNational Safety CouncilMothers Against Drunk DrivingStudents Against Destructive DecisionsCandy LightnerZero toleranceNational Transportation Safety BoardbenchmarkSupreme Court of the United StatesBirchfield v. North DakotaFourth AmendmentbreathUS statesimplied consentbreathalyzerprobable cause for arrestField sobriety testsIn Californiaimplied consent lawdoctor-patient confidentialityAmerican Medical AssociationMedical bioethicistJacob AppelNew York UniversityUnited States Federal Railroad AdministrationFederal Aviation AdministrationUnion Pacific RailroadDWI courtAssimilative Crimes Actstate lawFederal governmentCongress18 U.S.C.license platesNATO phonetic alphabetIgnition interlock deviceignition interlockalcoholic use disorderpseudo-civil punishmentimplied consent refusalimmobilizerSix Sigma (6σ)impoundmentforfeiture"civil law" sanctionsprobable causechemical test resultsexclusionary ruleUS Supreme CourtReasonable suspicionsobriety checkpointConfessionsocial conventionMiranda warningsField sobriety testingfield sobriety testproprioceptionEhlers-Danlos syndromeNystagmusheel-to-toeClemson UniversityRomberg test4th Amendmentinfrared spectroscopyfuel cellConstitutionalityhandcuffCalifornia Vehicle CodeUnited States Supreme CourtMissouri v. McNeelyblood alcohol test assumptionsDrug Recognition Expertdrunk tankrecognizancearraignmentremand14 CFRMichiganVirginiaCalifornialegal age for drinkingrandom breath testAmerica West Airlines Flight 556Carrollton bus disasterKentuckyDUI laws in CaliforniaThe Christian Science MonitorNew York Penal LawJacob M. Appeldefects per million opportunitiesCivil penaltiesThirteenth Amendment to the United States ConstitutionWayback MachineThe Wall Street JournalTraffic lawsafetyAll-way stopAssured clear distance aheadAustralian Road RulesBoulevard ruleGreen Cross CodeMove over lawNew Zealand Road CodeOvertakingLeft- and right-hand trafficBidirectional trafficSchool bus traffic stop lawsTraffic codeTurn on redVienna Convention on Road TrafficDriver's manualThe Highway CodeThe Highway Code (Malta)