Requiring suspended drunk drivers to install alcohol interlocks to reinstate their licenses : effective?
20101147 ST [electronic version only]
Voas, R.B. Tippetts, S.S. Fisher, D. & Grosz, M.
Addiction, Vol. 105 (2010), No. 8 (August), p. 1422-1428, 11 ref.
|Samenvatting||The aim of this study was to evaluate a new method being used by some states for motivating interlock installation by requiring it as a prerequisite to reinstatement of the driver's license. The driving records of Florida DWI offenders convicted between July 2002 and June 2008 were analyzed to determine the proportion of offenders subject to the interlock requirement who installed interlocks. Most driving-while-impaired (DWI) offenders succeed in avoiding state laws requiring the installation of a vehicle alcohol interlock. Participants were a total of 82 318 Florida DWI offenders. Due to long periods of complete suspension when no driving was permitted and the failure to complete all the requirements imposed by the court, only 21 377 of the 82 318 offenders studied qualified for reinstatement, but 93% of those who qualified did install interlocks to be reinstated. Because of the lengthy license suspensions and other barriers that the offenders face in qualifying for reinstatement, it is not clear that requiring a period on the interlock as a prerequisite to reinstating will greatly increase the current installment rate. (Author/publisher)|
|Full-text||Beschikbaar Niet beschikbaar, klik om contact op te nemen voor een digitalisatie verzoek|
|Suggestie?||Neem contact op met de SWOV bibliotheek voor uw opmerkingen|