THE PROBLEM

Repeat Offenders:

• About one-third of all drivers arrested or convicted of driving under the influence are repeat offenders. These drivers are 40% more likely to be involved in a fatal crash than those without prior DUIs.¹

High-BAC Offenders:

• 58% of alcohol-related traffic fatalities in 2001 involved drivers with a BAC of .15% and above.² These drivers are at least 382 times more likely to be involved in a fatal crash than a non-drinking driver.¹⁷

• During a typical weekend night, 1% of drivers will have a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .15 or higher.¹³

Offenders Who Drive on a Suspending License:

• 50-75% of drunk drivers whose licenses are suspended continue to drive.¹⁴

• 32% of suspended second-time offenders and 61% of suspended third-time offenders received violations or were involved in crashes during their suspensions.³

• Generally, unlicensed drivers are 4.9 times more likely to be involved in a fatal crash than properly licensed drivers.¹⁶

Drivers Who Refuse a BAC Test:

• Depending on the state, 3% to 59% of those under suspicion for DUI/DWI refused to take a BAC test.¹⁵

• Not surprisingly, those states that did not sanction those who refuse the test more than those who take the test had higher refusal rates. Also, offenders who refuse the test tend to have higher recidivism rates and more previous offenses.

MADD SOLUTIONS:  THE THREE R’S

• Restrict vehicle operation by suspending licenses, impounding or immobilizing vehicles, and requiring alcohol ignition interlock devices on offenders’ vehicles.

  • Studies show that license revocation laws can decrease fatal late-night crashes by 9%.⁶

  • Interlock systems have reduced repeat DWI offenses among convicted drinking drivers in Maryland⁷, California⁸ and other states^9,10 by 65% to 90%.

  • License suspension was effective in reducing DWI offenses among convicted drinking drivers in Ohio⁴. After two years, there were lower rates of moving violations and crashes compared with DUI offenders convicted before the law went into effect and this reduction significantly reduced alcohol-related fatalities.

  • Vehicle impoundment has reduced DWI offenses among convicted drinking drivers. First-time offenders who had their vehicles impounded had 25% fewer crashes and repeat offenders had 38% fewer crashes than similar offenders who had access to their vehicles in California.⁵

• Require compensation to the community through fines, mandatory incarceration and financial restitution to crash victims.

  • Community service has little or no impact on reducing recidivism. However, some judges use creative sentencing and restitution sanctions to create more meaning from sanctions.

  • Fines and court fees can be used to offset the costs of law enforcement efforts to crack down on drunk drivers and to pay the cost of treatment programs. They can also fund special minimum-security facilities for DUI offenders.

• Promote recovery programs through mandatory alcohol assessment and treatment, intensive probation and attendance at victim impact panels.

  • Over 70% of DUI offenders have alcohol abuse problems and between 10% and 50% were alcohol dependent.¹¹ Repeat offenders are the most likely to be alcohol dependent.

  • A 1995 study found that DUI offenders who participated in treatment programs had a 7-9% reduction in recidivism over those who had no treatment.¹²