Commentary on 'Vehicle Sanctions for Repeat Driving While Intoxicated Offenders' and on 'Challenges to Ignition Interlock Program Implementation'

摘要

The papers by Simon and Beirness provide comprehensive pictures of the judicial and administrative challenges facing vehicle sanctions and ignition interlock programs, respectively, for repeat driving while intoxicated (DWI) offenders. They both point out that offenders know that the probability of being caught driving while suspended is extremely low, especially if the offender obeys all rules of the road and is not involved in a crash. Neither stresses, however, the additional issue that vehicles are often "disposable" items to this population. The ready availability of inexpensive vehicles coupled with the various vehicle registration avoidance possibilities highlighted by Simon militate against the widespread success of any vehicle-based sanction. Simon presents many suggestions for improved state laws with respect to vehicle sanctions. Although he ably describes weaknesses in the current approaches and associated recommendations for improvement, there are overriding factors in opposition to stricter (i.e., more effective) laws. One is clearly cost. In this era of budget cutbacks, anything that increases enforcement, judicial, or administrative workload is unacceptable. Another is the traditional thinking or stereotyping discussed by Beimess. This thinking is slow to change even in the face of compelling research results. One sensational counterproductive event can easily undermine a program that is supported by clear empirical measures of overall effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.