Andrew Petrylka
Drunk Driving Laws
The Constitution of the United States guarantees its citizens a multitude of rights unique
to Americans: the right to free speech, the right to freedom of religion, and the right of people to
generally live their lives the way they see fit. However, the law places limitations on how people
may exercise their rights. A citizen may practice their rights as long as they do not interfere with
the rights of others. Many in America choose to drink alcohol in excess, which is within their
freedoms to do so. However, a great number of these people also choose to operate a motor
vehicle after consuming a large amount of alcohol, and believe it to be their right. It is at this
point that their rights are no longer protected by the law. The second someone gets behind the
wheel of a vehicle while intoxicated, their right to make choices in their life cannot be protected
by the power of the law, because once they start to drive, they put everyone else on the road at
risk. At that point, their right to drink infringes on the rights of everyone around them, namely
the right to life. The vast majority of Americans would agree that this is true, but the real
question is: is enough being done to prevent drunk driving? While there are laws to prevent
drunk driving, they require strengthening in order to prevent further news stories of children or
adults or any other person being killed by an intoxicated driver. These laws must be
strengthened by giving police the authority to arrest people before they enter their car, stricter
penalties for refusing a blood alcohol content test and repeat offenders, and utilizing sobriety
checkpoints.
Over the last two decades or so, the number of traffic fatalities involving alcohol have
decreased, but the numbers are still quite high. According to the Center for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC), “every day, 36 people in the United States die, and approximately 700more
are injured in motor vehicle crashes that involve an alcohol-impaired driver”. Also, according to
the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, in 2007, approximately 12,998 people were
killed in alcohol-related crashes. That was 31.7% of traffic fatalities. That is far too many. Also,
“the annual cost of alcohol-related crashes totals more than $51 billion”, according to the CDC.
This does not take into account the countless number of stories heard on the news of innocent
motorists, most often youths, killed while simply being on the road at the wrong time. Drunk
driving still remains a problem in America. But what should be done to counter it?
First of all, police should be given the authority to detain people who are intoxicated and
intend to operate a vehicle. America already has “drunk in public laws”, but these only pertain
to people who are in public and are intoxicated to the point where they are a danger to
themselves and to those around them. These laws are well and good, but there needs to be
nationwide laws that allow law enforcement officers to detain anyone who is over the legal limit
and intends on driving a vehicle. These laws should also be applicable on private property and
not just in public. If an official has reasonable cause to believe that a drunk individual intends to
drive a vehicle, they should have the authority to detain, but not necessarily arrest that individual
until they are sober or some friend or family member has come to pick them up. The standards
of reasonable cause here will be the same standards used by officers when observing a driver
they believe is drunk, thus eliminating any ambiguity about what true intent is and any
possibility for profiling. Since the law will be applicable to those on private property,
individuals at parties and at other occasions that believe someone intoxicated intends to drive
home, have the option to call police officers to have the individual detained, keeping them safely
off the road. These new laws must also be advertised to the public, so people are aware of this
option when dealing with a drunk individual.
Another step to help combat drunk driving is to make stricter penalties for those who
refuse to take a chemical blood alcohol content (BAC) test. The BAC test is the court’s best
piece of evidence to convict drunk drivers since it proves the driver was over the 0.08% legal
limit. By creating stricter penalties for refusal, it either obligates the offender to take the
chemical test or they will be kept off the road longer due to greater suspension of their license.
The best way to do this would be to initiate a nationwide use of administrative license suspension
laws. Administrative license suspension laws mean that a person’s license is suspended before
conviction if they refuse or fail to take a chemical test. This suspension goes into effect
immediately after the arrest and is not a part of the criminal case. That means that regardless of
whether the offender is convicted, they will still have their license suspended and will be kept
from driving for some period of time. This can be more effective than suspensions handed down
after a conviction.
Of course, some effort should be made in order to help reform alcoholic drivers. That is
why a system should be developed to determine if offenders are addicts or not. This system may
seem expensive, but it will also help to create jobs for counselors and other staff, and the human
lives that could be saved help to cover the cost. Those that do have an alcohol addiction should
be committed to a substance abuse counseling program. During this time, the offenders’ license
will be suspended until their counseling is complete. Those that are not deemed to have an
addiction will have their license suspended for a long period of time as well as substantial courtordered fines. This will all be in addition to any punishments obtained during the criminal case.
Such strong penalties for first time offenders are meant to dissuade them from repeat offenses.
Should someone have a second offense, the consequences should be more severe. In
addition to increased fines, license suspension time, and a criminal trial, the offender should have
any car in their name seized and impounded. Their car will remain impounded for the same
period of time as their license is suspended. During this time, the offender should also not be
allowed to purchase another vehicle. Once the vehicle is returned, the privilege to purchase
another vehicle will return as well. At this point, the offender knows their crime and should not
be committing the crime. Any repeat offenses after the second offense, could result in seizure of
vehicle for life and a life ban on purchasing a vehicle.
Sobriety checkpoints are also an effective method used by law enforcement to help catch
drunk drivers. They are often used at times when there is a heightened risk for people driving
under the influence of alcohol. They work by stopping drivers in a specific sequence, such as
every second or every sixth vehicle in an attempt to catch drunk drivers that may otherwise slip
under the radar. The publicity of these checkpoints helps to deter people from driving under the
influence rather than arrest those that do. They are also very effective. That being said, sobriety
checkpoints are not utilized as often as they should be. By increasing their number and
frequency, especially during holidays and the summer months, they could be used more
effectively as a deterrent and as a method to catch drunk drivers. An increase in sobriety
checkpoints may seem like it would strain budgets and police forces, but in reality, a checkpoint,
if done properly, can use as little as three to five officers. This is an efficient system that can be
utilized to help decrease drunk driving if it were only used more frequently.
Americans have been searching for the vice they believe has the most detrimental effect
on society. Some believe it is drugs. Others believe it is smoking. But no other addiction causes
more damage to more people than alcohol, especially paired with driving. Drinking can not only
destroy the life of the drivers, but also the lives of innocents as well. How many stories exist of a
drunk driver killing all the people, most often young people, in another car, while they
themselves walk away without a scratch. This kind of injustice is why driving while intoxicated
should be stopped at al costs in order to make the world, America, and the roads a much safer
place to travel.
Work Cited
“DWI/DUI Laws of U.S States.” Alcohol Problems and Solutions. 29 March 2009
<http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/Drivingissues/1104284869.html>
“High Visibility Law Enforcement.” MADD.org. 29 March 2009 < http://www.madd.org/DrunkDriving/Drunk-Driving/Campaign-to-Eliminate-Drunk-Driving/Law-Enforcement.aspx>
“Impaired Driving.” Center for Disease Control and Prevention. 24 November 2008. 29 March
2009 < http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/factsheets/drving.htm>
“Implied Consent.” Drunk Driving Lwas.org. 29 March 2009
<http://www.drunkdrivinglaws.org/impliedconsent.html>
Kavinoky, Darren T. “Drunk in Public.” 1.800.DUI.Laws. 30 March 2009
<http://www.1800duilaws.com/article/drunk_in_public.asp>
United States. U.S Department of Transportation. Nation Highway Traffic Safety
Administration. 2007 Traffic Safety Annual Assessment-Alcohol-Impaired Driving
Fatalities. Aug. 2008. 29 March 2009< http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811016.PDF>