HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Hingson, R Articles by Scotch, N A Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Hingson, R Articles by Scotch, N A

Effects of Maine's 1981 and Massachusetts' 1982 driving-under-the-influence legislation.

R Hingson, T Heeren, D Kovenock, T Mangione, A Meyers, S Morelock, R Lederman and N A Scotch

In 1981, Maine passed a drunk driving law with mandatory penalties and a new civil charge to increase the conviction rate. One year later, Massachusetts increased drunk driving penalties, particularly for repeat offenders and intoxicated drivers involved in fatal crashes. In Maine, single-vehicle nighttime fatal crashes declined 22 per cent the year before passage of the law, and 33 per cent the year after. Maine's rates returned to pre-law levels by the third post-law year. Prior to Massachusetts' new law, single-vehicle nighttime and overall fatal crashes there also declined 20% and 22%, whereas after this law fatal crash rates did not decline further compared with the pre-law year or other New England states. Pre- and post-law surveys indicate that both laws were followed by some increases in public perceptions that drunk drivers stopped by police would be arrested, convicted, and receive automatic penalties. But, few believed it was very likely that drunk drivers would be stopped. For only two of three years studied after Maine's law did more people there report decisions not to drive because they had drunk too much. In Massachusetts, reported driving after heavy drinking declined as much the year before as the three years after its law.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Villaveces, P. Cummings, T. D. Koepsell, F. P. Rivara, T. Lumley, and J. Moffat Association of Alcohol-related Laws with Deaths due to Motor Vehicle and Motorcycle Crashes in the United States, 1980-1997 Am. J. Epidemiol., January 15, 2003; 157(2): 131 - 140. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. D. Holder, R. F. Saltz, A. J. Treno, J. W. Grube, and R. B. Voas Evaluation Design for a Community Prevention Trial: An Environmental Approach to Reduce Alcohol-Involved Trauma Eval Rev, April 1, 1997; 21(2): 140 - 165. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. G. Lawthers, N. M. Laird, S. Lipsitz, L. Hebert, T. A. Brennan, and A. R. Localio Physicians' Perceptions of the Risk of Being Sued Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law, September 1, 1992; 17(3): 463 - 482. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K.-I. Klepp, C. L. Perry, and D. R. Jacobs Etiology of Drinking and Driving among Adolescents: Implications for Primary Prevention Health Educ Behav, December 1, 1991; 18(4): 415 - 427. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Hingson and J. Howland Alcohol, Injury, and Legal Controls: Some Complex Interactions J. Law Med. Ethics, March 1, 1989; 17(1): 58 - 68. [PDF]

				S. Farrell Policy Alternatives for Alcohol-Impaired Driving Health Educ Behav, January 1, 1989; 16(3): 413 - 427. [Abstract] [PDF]