A New Look at NHTSA's Evaluation of the 1984 Charlottesville Sobriety Checkpoint Program: Implications for Current Checkpoint Issues
A New Look at NHTSA's Evaluation of the 1984 Charlottesville Sobriety Checkpoint Program: Implications for Current Checkpoint Issues
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/15389580701682114
复制
发表时间：
2008-01-01
影响因子：
2
通讯作者：
Voas, Robert B.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Voas, Robert B.
Objective.目前，清醒检查站方案的实施已被证明在减少与酒精有关的撞车事故方面是有效的，但由于人们认为这些方案需要大量的警察，而且逮捕人数很少，因此实施工作受到限制。然而，对弗吉尼亚州夏洛茨维尔的检查站计划的最早评估之一表明，可以安装有效的检查站，其中警察逮捕的人数与定期巡逻的警察一样多。该研究由NHTSA印刷，但没有发表在同行评议的期刊上。由于它的意义，目前的问题，在人员配置和程序检查站业务，本文重新分析了研究结果，并介绍了在检查站实施的程序。一个前后对照的设计被用来衡量从三个基准年到计划年的夜间撞车事故的变化。进行了两项分析：第一个是在测试城市夏洛茨维尔发生的所有夜间撞车事故的百分比，第二个是在测试城市发生的弗吉尼亚州所有夜间撞车事故的百分比。此外，还进行了三波随机数字拨号电话调查：一波在检查站计划之前，两波在测试城市和比较城市布莱克斯堡进行。最后，在检查站每小时的受损驾驶逮捕的数量进行了比较，每小时的逮捕人数由定期巡逻的人员和逮捕的被动传感器的使用效果进行了测定。与基线水平相比，夏洛茨维尔夜间撞车事故的月百分比降低了17%（p = 000）。弗吉尼亚州夏洛茨维尔发生的夜间撞车事故的百分比比基线水平降低了11%（p = 0.013）。在检查站逮捕的司机比在常规巡逻中逮捕的司机有更低的BAC;但是，定罪率是相同的。两类执法行动的每小时拘捕人数并无显著差异。在测试城市的夜间风险驾驶员中，检查站活动的意识很高（72%）。一半的人报告说看到了检查站的行动，四分之一的人报告说接受了采访。在检查站使用被动式酒精传感器的官员增加了逮捕几乎三倍。结论。评估的结果表明，小规模的清醒检查站可以实施的一部分，在中等规模的司法管辖区的常规执法计划，他们可以有效地生产逮捕标准的执法巡逻，特别是如果使用被动酒精传感器。
Objective. Currently, the implementation of sobriety checkpoint programs, which have been demonstrated to be effective in reducing alcohol-related crashes, is limited by the belief that they require large consignments of police officers and result in few arrests. However, one of the earliest evaluations of a checkpoint program in Charlottesville, Virginia, demonstrated that effective checkpoints could be mounted in which police officers made as many arrests as officers on regular patrols. That study was printed by the NHTSA but was not published in a peer-reviewed journal. Because of its significance to current issues in the staffing of and procedures for checkpoint operations, this article reanalyzes the results of that study and describes the procedures implemented in checkpoints.Methods. A before-and-after control design was used to measure the change in nighttime crashes from three baseline years to the program year. Two analyses were conducted: the first on the percentage of all crashes occurring at night in the test city-Charlottesville-and the second on the percentage of all nighttime crashes in the state of Virginia that occurred in the test city. In addition, three waves of random-digit-dialing telephone surveys were conducted: one before and two during the checkpoint program in the test city, and the comparison city, Blacksburg. Finally, the number of impaired-driving arrests per officer hour at the checkpoints was compared with the number of arrests per hour by officers on regular patrol and the effect on arrests of the use of passive sensors was determined.Results. The monthly percentage of nighttime crashes in Charlottesville was reduced by 17% ( p = 000) in relation to the baseline level. The percentage of nighttime crashes in the state of Virginia that occurred in Charlottesville was reduced by 11% ( p =.013) from baseline levels. Drivers arrested at checkpoints had lower BACs than those arrested by the regular patrols; however, the conviction rates were the same. The arrest per officer hour did not differ significantly between the two types of enforcement operations. Awareness of the checkpoint activity was high (72%) among nighttime at-risk drivers in the test city. Half reported seeing a checkpoint operation, and a quarter reported being interviewed. Use of a passive alcohol sensor by officers at the checkpoint increased arrests by almost a factor of three.Conclusions. The results of the evaluation suggest that small-scale sobriety checkpoints can be implemented as part of the regular enforcement program in moderate-sized jurisdictions and that they can be as efficient in producing arrests as standard enforcement patrols, particularly if passive alcohol sensors are used.