U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

PROBLEMS IN DETERRENCE: A COMPARISON OF THE DRIVING HISTORIES OF DUII (DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF INTOXICANTS) AND NON-DUII DRIVERS

NCJ Number
146170
Journal
Journal of Studies on Alcohol Dated: (November 1992) Pages: 576- 581
Author(s)
R L Hall; M M Smith; L Song; K Beerman
Date Published
1992
Length
6 pages
Annotation
This study compares the characteristics of DUII (driving under the influence of intoxicants) and non-DUII drivers and recidivists; policies of specific and general deterrence are discussed.
Abstract
Several years ago, the authors analyzed 12.5 years of driving history in a population of individuals arrested for DUII during 1983 in one Oregon county. The study's objective was to identify factors that distinguished recidivists (those with more than one DUII arrest) from those who had only one DUII offense. Results showed that recidivism was associated with minor or major criminal offenses and with behavior patterns typical of those who are alcohol abusers or alcohol-dependent. This study extends analysis of Division of Motor Vehicle records for the original population of 397 individuals through June 13, 1989. The authors compared the driving records of a subset of the DUII sample with a random sample of Oregon non-DUII drivers drawn in 1984. The driving records of recidivists and nonrecidivists were compared with records of an age-matched and sex-matched random sample of non-DUII groups. Results show major differences between DUII and non-DUII groups in the incidence of traffic violations; however, some differences existed between nonrecidivist and recidivist DUII subjects. Rehabilitative diversion programs for first- time DUII offenders did not affect recidivism rates in the study population. Findings suggest that general deterrence that targets the non-DUII population should receive as much emphasis as specific deterrence directed at DUII offenders. 1 figure, 3 tables, and 20 references