Sobriety checkpoints – the answer to impaired driving?

December 11, 2013

This year, in response to several high profile tragedies, the legislature passed SB 5912 – toughening penalties against drunk drivers. Among other things, the bill directed the Washington State Traffic Safety Commission (WTSC) to convene a working group charged with evaluating 15 strategies for reducing injury and death due to impaired driving.

This week, the Impaired Driving Working Group, co-chaired by Rep. Roger Goodman and Sen. Mike Padden, released their 152 page report.

Rep. Goodman, (winner of MADD’s legislator of the year award) who has been convening his own impaired driving working group for years, said, “It was important to bring together all of the key players who deal with the impaired driving problem, on the ground, on a daily basis. We all learned a tremendous amount from one another, from law enforcement and judges and treatment providers and especially the voice of victims. Important recommendations have come from this process and I look forward to acting on them in the upcoming legislative session.”

Over the course of three meetings, the group discussed the 15 prevention methods and ranked their top 11 by effectiveness. The chart below shows the results as well as their percentage of support:sobriety strategies

Based on the rankings one might think that the top three recommendations are pretty effective at reducing death and injury from impaired driving. Here is how the WTSC described the effectiveness of strategies 1-3:

  1. Increasing penalties for refusing to take blood or breath test – the WTSC says, “Research suggests this strategy is EFFECTIVE for reducing test refusal rates, resulting in drinking drivers being more appropriately punished, and those in need of treatment more appropriately identified.”
  2. Increasing mandatory minimum sentencing and fines – the WTSC said, “Research suggests this strategy is INEFFECTIVE.”
  3. Lowering the number of convictions before the offense becomes a felony – the WTSC said, “This strategy has NO AVAILABLE RESEARCH or evaluations on the effectiveness”

But when we get to strategy #4, sobriety checkpoints, the report says, “Research shows that sobriety checkpoints are MOST EFFECTIVE for reducing deaths and serious injuries that are a result of impaired driving incidents.”

Supporters say sobriety checkpoints are cost effective (other prevention methodsdrunk driving cost millions of dollars) and they save lives. In the 38 states that use sobriety checkpoints, they’ve been shown to reduce deaths from drunk driving by 22-33%. Here in Washington that could mean 50-60 fewer deaths per year.

However, Washington is one of 12 states where sobriety checkpoints are not used because of prohibitions by state law or constitution. The State Supreme Court (Seattle v. Mesiani, 1988) has ruled them to be unconstitutional without an authorizing statute. And opponents think checkpoints are a violation of our right to privacy.

What do you think? Would you support a change to the State Constitution to allow sobriety checkpoints?

Photo credit – freedigitalphotos.net, Naypong