Drink-drive laws compared

Press, 26 February 1983, Page 14

Drink-drive laws compared

By

LINDA GORTMAKER,

through NZPA Washington Drunken driving laws in countries calling for such drastic measures as Sweden's one-month jail sentences or France’s arbitrary roadblocks may sound harsh, but their long-term effectiveness is minimal. “There are no existing models that offer [the United States] a great deal of hope.” Dr Laurence Ross, author of •“Deterring the Drinking Driver,” told more than 500 participants recently at an international meeting on alcohol and driving. Policemen, judges, insurance agents, professors, and members of grass-roots groups such as Mothers Against Drunk Drivers, listened to experts from Australia, Sweden, France, and Britain, as well as states with new, aggressive laws such as New York and California. describe ways to reduce in number the 25,000 people who die every year in the United States from drunken driving. As the world pioneers in using blood-alcohol content as proof of intoxication, Scandinavia is frequently the envy of American experts when a country such as Sweden with a population of 8 million people last year only produced 200 drunk driving convictions. Sweden achieves this record with random breath tests where drivers are stopped at roadblocks, a practice American officials have generally avoided because of civil rights problems. Swedish law also provides for stiff jail terms, and the judges use them. “One month’s imprisonment is common in Sweden,” said Dr Hans Gustav Klette, a Swedish attorney who advises the Swedish Governirnent and the World Health ® France also has a comprehensive roadblock law, and some of Australia’s states have adopted that approach. • But as each of these country’s experts explained the details of their, particular .system, the “tough" parts of

the law sound softer, and the experts admitted that most new drunk driving laws have only initial short-term effects, or work only after decades of use. The Swedish one-month jail term does not sound sc awful after Dr Klette noted that “you can go for one month whenever you want, and we have small, countryside prisons, with no locks.” where the prisoners do light industrial or forestry work. Dr Ross personally monitored the roadblocks France has used since enactment of its 1978 law. He watched one evening as 450 drivers were stopped, and none, even those with obviously high bloodalcohol content levels, were detained. One French policeman asked an apparently inebriated driver to let his female companion drive the car instead, “and who knows what the woman's alcohol content was,” Dr Ross said. “Nobody asked.” “English drunken driving laws have softer penalties, and avoid the unacceptable,” said Mr William Kelsall, the retired Chief Constable of Cheshire. England. But in 1975, Mr Kelsall mounted his “Cheshire blitz,” renowned in law enforcement circles, which changed the role of police officers in stopping cars and checking for alcohol levels in the case of an accident, moving violation. or suspicion of use of alcohol. “We required the police officer to give breath tests in all these cases,” Mr Kelsall said, “instead of leaving it to their discretion.” The results were dramatic. The police gave 10 to 11 times more tests, and found double the number of drunk drivers. But Mr Kelsall, as well as other American and foreign experts speaking at the ■meeting sponsored by the Insurance Information Institute of New York, agreed that such stepped-up enforcement by police requires much money and personnel and may. not be the most effective use of resources. In spite of the relative' success at curbing.drunken

driving in Sweden, Dr Klette admitted that even his country had not discovered a way to control two hard-core groups: youths aged between 18 and 24 who are "giant risk-takers” and the chronic drinkers who need medical or professional help. On the young offenders. Dr Klette said, “they use their cars as mobile homes; they don't use seat belts and just drive too fast.” Mr lan Johnston, of the Australian Road Research Board, said a combination of strict laws had minimised his country’s incidences of drunken driving. He attributed the success of laws in part to the history of the Australian people. “We began life as a British prison, and so ■ our people may be more law abiding." he said. “They don't mind wearing seat belts. I don't know if the United States could ever handle such a mandatory law.” Revocation of a drunken driver's licence was discussed by all the experts as a possible effective deterrent that United States laws should include. Others suggested having bars and clubs report on drunks in their establishments, and one participant suggested that the United States should develop a car that wouldn't start if a drunk person tried to drive it. The United States and Australia are already researching this idea. New laws enacted in New York and California attracted the most attention of United States laws from the symposium, participants. ■ Both laws require stiff penalties and some mandatory jail terms, but the New York law drew the most praise because it uses part of the fees charged to drunk drivers to pay for increased enforcement. “This year, we gave SUSB million (SNZII.2B million) back to the counties.” said Mr Leslie Foschio.’ New York State Commissioner of Motor-Vehicles. "In some metropolitan areas, that has meant a 30 per cent increase in the arrest rate."