Drinking and driving and perceptions of arrest risk among California drivers: Relationships with DUI arrests in their city of residence

Abstract

Objective Addressing drinking and driving remains a challenge in the U.S. The present study aims to provide feedback on DUI in California by assessing if drinking and driving behavior is associated with the DUI arrest rates in the city in which the driver lives; if this is through perceptions that one can get arrested for this behavior; and if this differed by those drivers who would be most affected by deterrence efforts (those most likely to drink outside the home). Methods This study consisted of a 2012 roadside survey of 1,147 weekend nighttime drivers in California. City DUI arrest rates for 2009–2011 were used as an indicator of local enforcement efforts. Population average logistic modeling was conducted modeling the odds of perceived high arrest likelihood for DUI and drinking and driving behavior within the past year. Results As the DUI arrest rates for the city in which the driver lives increased, perceived high risk of DUI arrest increased. There was no significant relationship between either city DUI arrest rates or perceived high risk of DUI arrest with self-reported drinking and driving behavior in the full sample. Among a much smaller sample of those most likely to drink outside the home, self-reported drinking and driving behavior was negatively associated with DUI arrests rates in their city of residence but this was not mediated by perceptions. Conclusion The results of the present study suggest that perceptions are correlated with one aspect of DUI efforts in one’s community. Those who were more likely to drink outside the home could be behaviorally influenced by these efforts.

Interpol review of toxicology 2016–2019

“…Surveys on alcohol and drugs on drivers provide valuable information on abuse patterns and trends, which help to establish new examination methods and legal limits as well as preventative measures. Numerous surveys on driving under the influence of alcohol and drugs were conducted worldwide through analyzing data from traffic offences and accidents as well as from roadside testing [ [34] , [35] , [36] , [37] , [38] , [39] , [40] , [41] , [42] , [43] , [44] , [45] , [46] , [47] , [48] , [49] , [50] , [51] , [52] , [53] , [54] , [55] , [56] , [57] , [58] , [59] , [60] , [61] , [62] , [63] , [64] , [65] , [66] ]. The surveys revealed that in addition to alcohol, drugs including cannabis, amphetamines and cocaine were frequently taken by the drivers, while polydrug uses were not rare.…”

The effect of the Safer at Home order on the frequency of DUI breath alcohol tests in Los Angeles County

“…

The current data from The National Center for Statistics and Analysis (NCSA) Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) shows that, in Los Angeles County, 670 deaths were involved in a motor vehicle traffic crash in 2018 [1]. There is evidence that some drivers in California have accepted the practice of drinking and driving [2] even though there is a perceived high risk of arrest [3,4]. This situation may actually be underestimated due to underreporting of actual alcoholimpaired driving [5].Los Angeles County has a population size of just over 10 million inhabitants.

…”