Impaired Driving Subcommittee Impaired Driving Guidebook - NHTSA

More documents

Recommendations

Info

ENDNOTES1 Taylor, Dexter; Miller, Ted; and Cox, Kenya.“Impaired Driving in the United States Cost FactSheets.” (Washington, DC: National HighwayTraffic Safety Administration, 2002).http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/alcohol/impaired_driving_pg2/US.htm2 George L. Kelling, Catherine M. Coles(Contributor), James Q. Wilson, Fixing BrokenWindows: Restoring Order and Reducing Crime inOur Communities (Free Press, 1996).3See Gladwell, Malcolm, The Tipping Point: HowLittle Things Make a Big Difference, (2000)].4 M. Durose, E. Schmitt, and P. Langan,Contacts between Police and the Public: Findingsfrom the 2002 National Survey (Bureau of JusticeStatistics April 2005).http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cpp02.pdf5The first photo on the cover is of anAccountability Driven Leadership processconducted by the Washington State Patrol (calledthe “Strategic Advancement Forum” and modeledafter the New York Police Department Compstatprocess). On the first Friday of each month, everydistrict commander (captain) in the state comes toheadquarters to report to the executive staff on coremission activities. The first of the four core missionareas is traffic law enforcement (primarily DUI,Speed, Aggressive Driving, and Seat Beltenforcement). Commanders report on theseactivities as well as the number of fatality and injurycollision patterns and trends. These commandersconduct similar forums in their districts with theirlieutenants and sergeants.6 IACP Highway Safety Deskbook,http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/enforce/deskbk.html7 Reduction in Alcohol-Related TrafficFatalities—United States, 1990-1992, 271 J. A.M.A.99 (January 23, 1994).8 See Duncan v. Cone, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS33221 (6 th Cir. 2000); Smelser v. Troutdale, 2000 U.S.App. LEXIS 16134 (9 th Cir. 2000); Roberts v. State,2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 22753; 2000 Colo. J. C.A.R.5225 (10 th Cir. 2000); John Doe No. 1 v. Ga. Dep'tof Pub. Safety, 147 F. Supp. 2d 1369 (U.S.D.C. N. D.Ga. 2001); McFarland v. Mackey, 1988 U.S. Dist.LEXIS 15638 (U.S.D.C. Mass. 1988); Flatt v. Miller,1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1883 (U.S.D.C. W. D. Mich.1996); League of United Latin Am. Citizens v.Bredesen, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26507 (U.S.D.C. M. D.Tn. 2004); Wells v. Malloy, 402 F. Supp.856 (U.S.D.C. Vt. 1975).23
APPENDIX A – ResolutionHIGHWAY SAFETY:A RENEWED EFFORT TO ELIMINATEALCOHOL AND DRUG IMPAIRED DRIVINGSubmitted by the Highway Safety CommitteeWHEREAS, public safety is the highestpriority of the U.S. Department of Transportation,Transport Canada, and lawenforcement agencies; andWHEREAS, the best efforts of lawenforcement and other government agenciesand private organizations have madesignificant gains in the past in reducingimpaired driving; andWHEREAS, according to the NationalHighway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),in 2005, 16,972 people were killed in crashesinvolving alcohol, representing 39% of the43,200 people killed in all traffic crashes,representing a 1.7% increase over theprevious year; andWHEREAS, research indicates the effect ofdrugs, alone, or in combination with alcohol,contribute significantly to the number of fataland injury crashes; andWHEREAS, law enforcement officersexperience firsthand the devastatingemotional, mental, and physical effects ofimpaired driving; andWHEREAS, the IACP encourages all othercomponents of the criminal justice system,including prosecutors and the judiciary, towork cooperatively to eliminate impaireddriving; andWHEREAS, the IACP urges SACOP toencourage their member agencies toconsistently participate in aggressive highvisibility impaired driving enforcement; andWHEREAS, according to NHTSA, sustainedhigh visibility law enforcement is clearly thebest strategy for reducing impaired driving;now, therefore be itRESOLVED, that the InternationalAssociation of Chiefs of Police, dulyassembled at its 113th Annual Conference inBoston, Massachusetts, supports a renewedeffort for every law enforcement agency totake full advantage of known best practices,in particular aggressive high visibilityenforcement, to work vigorously toward theelimination of impaired driving; and be itFURTHER RESOLVED, that the IACP supportsthe use of the IACP Highway SafetyCommittee Impaired Driving Subcommittee“Impaired Driving Guidebook: Three Keys toRenewed Focus and Success” as a resourcetool in our effort to eliminate impaired driving.WHEREAS, research has shown strong andeffective laws combined with highly visibleenforcement not only reduces impaireddriving, but also reduces other crimes as well;andWHEREAS, there are many strategies thatcan and should be deployed in our fightagainst impaired driving; andWHEREAS, the IACP encourages alliedorganizations, both public and private, towork cooperatively with law enforcement toeliminate impaired driving; and24
Page 1 and 2: P O L I C EImpaired DrivingSubcommi
Page 3 and 4: ACKNOWLEDGMENTSThe Impaired Driving
Page 5 and 6: IACP HIGHWAY SAFETY COMMITTEEIMPAIR
Page 7: EXECUTIVE SUMMARYImpaired driving c
Page 10 and 11: LEADERSHIP Encourage the FBI Nation
Page 12 and 13: CRIMINAL JUSTICE COLLABORATIONPARTN
Page 14 and 15: CRIMINAL JUSTICE COLLABORATIONgrowt
Page 16 and 17: CRIMINAL JUSTICE COLLABORATION⎯ W
Page 18 and 19: COMMUNICATIONimpact on public behav
Page 20 and 21: COMMUNICATIONaudience have a clear
Page 22 and 23: COMMUNICATIONMany traffic safety pa
Page 26 and 27: APPENDIX B - Internet Resources for
Page 28 and 29: APPENDIX C - Potential PartnersPote
Page 30: APPENDIX D - Acronym KeyAAAAAMVAAAS

Impaired Driving Subcommittee Impaired Driving Guidebook - NHTSA

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?