People driving under the influence of alcohol are usually referred to as drunk drivers , or driver-beverages . When charged with this as a crime, it may either be referred to as DUI (Driving Under the Influence) or DWI (Drunk Driving While), where DUI is generally regarded as a lesser crime. Studies have been conducted to identify similarities between heavy drunk drivers. The law is also enforced to protect citizens from the consequences of drunk drivers.
According to "Why a drunk driver might be behind the wheel", the article Mental Health Weekly Digest, "[a] A motor vehicle accidents related to alcohol claims 17,000 Americans live each year - the equivalent of one death every 30 minutes Increased Blood Alcohol Concentration BAC) of 0.02 percent doubled the relative risk of motor vehicle accidents among men aged 16 to 20 years, and the risk increased to almost 52 times when the BAC was between 0.08 percent and 0.10 percent, the legal limit in many state. "In fact," To help control the number of drunk driving episodes, the state has lowered the alcohol content limit in the blood to 0.08%. " In the case of American law driving under the influence or moment of intoxication "there is never a defense against a crime or a motor vehicle offense involving reckless behavior."
Video Drunk drivers
Efek alkohol pada proses kognitif
Alcohol has a very significant effect on body functions that are essential for driving and able to function. Alcohol is a depressant, which primarily affects brain function. Alcohol first affects the most important components of the brain and "when the cerebral cortex is released from its integration and control functions, the processes associated with judgment and behavior occur in an irregular manner and the proper operation of the behavioral tasks becomes impaired. " In all actualities alcohol weakens the various skills necessary to perform daily tasks.
One of the main effects of alcohol greatly damages a person's ability to distract from one thing to another, "without significantly damaging the sensory motor function." This shows that drunk people can not distract them without affecting the senses. The drunk person also has a much narrower vision area than a conscious person. Information received by the brain from the eye "becomes disrupted if the eye has to be directed sideways to detect stimuli, or if the eye has to be moved quickly from one point to another."
Some testing mechanisms are used to measure a person's driving abilities, which indicate the level of poisoning. One is referred to as a tracking task, testing hand-eye coordination, in which "the task is to keep the object on a specified path by controlling its position by rotating the steering wheel.A performance degradation is seen in BACs as slightly 0.7 milligrams per milliliter (mg/ml ). "Another form of test is the task of choice reactions, which relate more to cognitive function. In the form of this test, hearing and vision are tested and the driver must provide "responses in accordance with rules requiring mental processes before providing an answer." This is a useful measure because in a driving situation the actual driver should share their attention "between tracking tasks and environmental oversight." It has been found that even "very low BACs are sufficient to produce significant performance degradation" within this area of ​​thought process.
Grand Rapids Dip
Studies show that BAC 0.01-0.04% will slightly lower the risk, referred to as Grand Rapids Effect or Grand Rapids Dip, based on a seminal research study by Borkenstein. , et al. (Robert Frank Borkenstein famous for creating Drunkometer in 1938, and a breathalyzer in 1954.)
Some literature has linked the Grand Rapids Effect with incorrect data or confirmed (without support) that it may be caused by extra careful drivers at low BAC levels or to "experience" in drinking. Another explanation is that this effect is at least partially blocking the effects of ethanol excitotoxicity and the effects of alcohol in essential tremor and other motion disorders, but this remains speculative.
Reception rate level
The direct effect of alcohol on a person's brain is an overestimate of how quickly their bodies recover from the effects of alcohol. A study, discussed in the article "Why drunk drivers can get behind the wheel", has been done with students where students are tested with "hidden labyrinth learning tasks because their BAC [Blood Alcohol Content] rises and falls over an 8 hour period. "The researchers found through the study that when students become more intoxicated, there is an increase in their errors" and the restoration of the underlying cognitive disorder that causes these errors to be slower, and more closely related to actual blood alcohol concentrations, rather than a faster reduction in subjective feelings subjective from drunk. "
Participants believe they are recovering from the bad effects of alcohol much faster than they really are. This feeling of perceived recovery is a plausible explanation of why so many people feel that they can safely operate a motor vehicle when they have not fully recovered from the alcohol they are consuming, suggesting that recovery rates are not appropriate.
The process of thinking and brain function lost under the influence of alcohol is a very important element in driving safely, including "making judgments on the way through intersections or changing lanes when driving." This important driving skill is lost when a person is under the influence of alcohol.
Maps Drunk drivers
Characteristics of a drunk driver
Personality characters
Although the situation is different and everyone is unique, some common traits have been identified among drunk drivers. In a study of "personality traits and mental health of drunken heavy drivers in Sweden", 162 DUI scholars of all ages were researched to find links in psychological factors and characteristics. There are various common characteristics among the DUI offenders discussed, including: "anxiety, depression, inhibition, low assertiveness, neuroticism and introversion". There is also a more specific type of personality, usually more antisocial, among repeated DUI offenders. It is not uncommon for them to actually be diagnosed with antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) and show some of the following personality traits: "low social responsiveness, lack of self-control, hostility, poor decision-making lifestyles, low emotional adjustment, aggression, sensation and impulsivity ".
It is also common for offenders to use drinking as a coping mechanism, not necessarily for social or pleasure reasons, when they are antisocial and have a father with a history of alcoholism. Offenders who start drinking at an early age for sensation and "pleasure" are more likely to become antisocial later in life. The majority of the samples, 72%, came from a "normal" state. The group is older when they start drinking, coming from a family with no history of alcoholism, relatively well behaved as a child, unaffected physically and emotionally by alcohol when compared to the rest of the study, and has less emotional complications, such as anxiety and depression. The smaller portion of the sample, 28%, comes from what is generally considered to be less than the desired state, or "abnormal". They tend to start drinking heavier in life and "show more premorbid risk factors, have more substance abuse and psychosocial disorders."
Various characteristics associated with drunk drivers are found more frequently in one sex than the other. Women are more likely to be affected by mental and physical health problems, have family and social problems, have larger drug use, and are often unemployed. However, women tend to have less legal problems than a typical male offender. Some of the specific problems women face is that "almost half of alcoholic women have previously attempted suicide, and nearly a third have anxiety disorders." In contrast to women, men are more likely to have profound problems and more complications involved, such as "a more complex problem profile, that is a more legal, psychological, and work-related problem when compared to alcoholic women." In general, the sample, when aligned with the control group, was tested to be much more impulsive in general.
Another similarity among the whole group is that DUI offenders are less fortunate than the general population of drivers. Correlations have been found between lack of awareness and accidents, which means that "low-awareness drivers are more often involved in driving accidents than other racers." When tested the drivers were rated very highly in the areas of "depression, vulnerability (stress), excitement, simplicity, gentle mind", but significantly lower in the field of "intellectual (curiosity), competence, struggling and self-discipline." Sample was also tested much higher than the norm in "somatization, obsessions, interpersonal sensitivity, depression, anxiety, hostility, anxiety phobias, paranoia, psychotics", especially in the field of depression. Through this test, the previously neglected character of the DUI offender character is found by "low scores on openness for domain experience." This area "includes intellectual curiosity, acceptance to the inner world of fantasy and imagination, appreciation of art and beauty, openness to inner emotions, values, and active experience." In all these various factors, there is only one that shows a relapse to driving under the influence of: depression.
Cognitive process
Not only are the personality traits of DUI offenders unequal from the rest of the population, but also can their thought processes, or cognitive processes. They are unique because "they often drink despite the severity of legal and financial sanctions imposed on them by the public."
In addition to these social restrictions, DUI offenders neglect their own personal experiences, including social and physical consequences. The study of "Cognitive Predictors of Alcohol Involvement and Consumption of Alcohol-Related Consumptions in the Sample of Drunk-Driving Offenders" was conducted in Albuquerque, New Mexico on cognitive, or mental, factors of DUI offenders. Characteristics such as gender, marital status, and age of DWI offenders are similar to those in other populations. Approximately 25% of women and 21% of male offenders have received a "lifelong diagnosis of alcohol abuse" and 62% of women and 70% of men "receive a diagnosis of alcohol dependence." All offenders have at least one DWI and men are more likely to have multiple quotes. In terms of drinking patterns about 25% stated that "they had been drinking alcohol the previous day, while an additional 32% indicated they were drunk in the past week." In terms of domestic drinking, "25% of the samples drink at least once a week in their own homes." Different items are tested to see if they play a role in the decision to drink alcohol, which includes socializing, the hope that drinking is fun, the financial source for buying alcohol, and the relief from stress at work. The study also focuses on two main areas, "intrapersonal gestures," or internal cues, which are "reactions to internal psychological or physical events" and "interpersonal cues" resulting from "social influences in drinking situations." The two largest factors between the areas tested were the destructive use of alcohol and its relationship to "drinking stimulants." Again, different behavior is characteristic of men and women. Men "are more likely to abuse alcohol, are arrested for DWI offenses, and report worse consequences related to alcohol." However, the effects of alcohol on women vary because the metabolism of women processes alcohol significantly when compared with men, which increases their chances for poisoning. The biggest indicator for drinking is situational cues consisting of "psychological knocking indicators (eg letting yourself go down, fighting with friends, and getting angry at something), social (eg relaxed and fun), and somatic gestures (eg how tasty it feels , past liquor stores, and high sexual pleasure). "
Perhaps internal forces are more likely to encourage DWI offenders to drink rather than externally, which is indicated by the fact that the brain and body play a greater role than social influences. This possibility seems very likely in repeated DWI offenders, because recurring violations (unlike the first offense) are not positively correlated with the availability of alcohol. Other cognitive factors may use alcohol to address the problem. It became clear that the offenders of DWI did not use appropriate coping mechanisms and then turned to alcohol for the answer. Examples of such problems "include fights, arguments, and problems with people at work, all of which imply the need for adaptive coping strategies to help high-risk drinkers to offset pressures or demands." DWI actors usually prefer to switch to alcohol rather than a healthier coping mechanism and alcohol can lead to more anger that can produce a vicious cycle of drinking more alcohol to deal with alcohol-related problems. This is not a professional way of telling people how best to deal with the struggles of everyday life and calls for "the need to develop internal controls and self-regulatory mechanisms that weaken stress, alleviate the effects of relapse-based cues, and dampen drinking impulse as part of therapeutic interventions. "
The implied approval law
There are laws applicable to protecting residents from drunk drivers, so-called implied permit laws. Motorists automatically approve these laws, which include related testing, when they start driving.
In most jurisdictions (with certain exceptions from some, like Brazil), refusing consent is a crime different from DWI itself and has its own set of consequences. There are cases where drivers are "exempt from DWI offenses and punished for rejection (they are separate violations), often with significant consequences (usually suspension of licenses)". A driver must give full approval to comply with the test because "anything less than the unqualified and firm consent to take the Breathalyzer test is a rejection." It has also been decided that the defendant is not allowed to request testing after they refuse to assist the officer's job "to remove drunk drivers from the highway" and ensure that all results are accurate.
United States
Implicit approval laws are found in all 50 US states and require drivers to apply for chemical testing, called clear blood alcohol tests , after arrest. This law has so far been proven in accordance with the Constitution and legally. The law of implied consent usually results in civil law consequences (but implements criminal penalties), such as driver suspensions.
To request an implied approval, the police must set a possible cause . Field Sobriety Tests (FSTs or SFSTs), Preliminary Breath Tests (PBTs) are often used to obtain possible causes , which are required to capture or apply implied consent.
Some states have passed laws that impose criminal penalties based on the principle of implied consent. However, by 2016, the Kansas Supreme Court ruled that Kansans who refused to submit breath or blood tests in DUI investigations could not be criminally prosecuted for the refusal. The court found unconstitutional state law making it a crime to refuse such a test when there was no court order. In Decision 6-1, the court found that the tests were essentially searches and the law punished people for using their constitutional right to be free of unreasonable search and seizures.
Birchfield v. North Dakota
Furthermore, the US Supreme Court, at Birchfield v. North Dakota states that a breath test, but not a blood test, can be given as a search incident against a legitimate arrest for drunk driving. The court stated, "Since the breath test is significantly less intrusive than blood testing and in many cases is enough to serve law enforcement interests, breath tests, but not blood tests, can be given as a search incident for a legitimate arrest for drunk driving." that no warrant is required for a test of a proven breath, but that a warrant is required for criminal prosecution for the rejection of a blood test. Birchfield opens the possibility of a "civil" pseudo-penalty penalty for rejection of a blood test (under implied Consent, without a warrant); But most law enforcement agencies respond to Birchfield by requesting a clear breath test, as the criminal status of a proven breath test is proven.
Non-proof testing
In the US, implied permission laws generally do not apply to the Initial Breathing Examination (PBT) tests (small handheld devices, not proven breathing apparatus). For breathing apparatus used for breath testing, the device must be properly certified and calibrated, a clear procedure must be followed, and it may be necessary to set the "implied consent" warning to the suspect before the test.
For some violations, such as a refusal by a commercial driver or by a driver below 21 years of age, some US jurisdictions may impose implied consent terms for the denial of PBT. For example, the state of Michigan has a roadside PBT law that requires the driver to perform a breath test early; however, for non-commercial racers, Michigan's penalties are limited to "civil violation" penalties, without "points" violations, but are not considered to be rejection under the "implied consent" law.
Participation in "field peace test" (FSTs or SFSTs) is voluntary in the US.
See also
- Drive under influence
References
Further reading
- "Why a drunk driver might be behind the wheel." Mental Health Weekly Digest (2010). Web. 2 September 2010.
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments