Category: Driving

24/7 Sobriety Programs Reduce Drunk Driving

In 2005, South Dakota launched a new approach to reducing alcohol-impaired and drunk driving. It was spearheaded by the state’s Attorney General at the time, Larry Long. It’s called a 24/7 sobriety program. The problem of drunk driving was enormous. Over one in five residents admitted to having driven while intoxicated. And three of every […]

Surprising Effects of Drugs on Driving Safety

Driving a vehicle requires performing a number of tasks at the same time. It also requires successfully completing quickly changing and unexpected tasks. Learn the surprising effects of drugs on driving safety. They’re are not so simple as often thought. A number of commonly used drugs can either reduce or enhance a person’s ability to drive […]

We Save Lives: Drugged, Distracted, and Drunken driving

We Save Lives educates the public and policy makers about the dangers of the 3D’s. These are Drugged, Distracted, and Drunken driving. It is led by the pioneering founder of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Candy Lightner. We’ve made great progress in reducing alcohol-related traffic fatalities since 1980, when Ms. Lightner began raising public awareness of the problem. The […]

Drugged Driving

Drugged driving. Is it really a problem? The dangers of driving while intoxicated have been widely understood for the last 35 years and the dangers of distracted driving are finally being recognized. However, the dangers of drugged driving remain almost totally unrecognized. This leads to the needless deaths of thousands of people each year in […]

Main Pages
DWI/DUI Issues
DWI/DUI Statistics
Treatment/Prevention of DWI/DUI


  • Alberta Transportation & Utilities. Designated Driver ­ A Smart Choice. Edmonton, Alberta, Canada: 1996 (
  • Amenda, P. J. Temperance for a New Age: The Crusade Against Drunk Driving, 1980-1997. (Fresno, CA: California State University, M.A. thesis, 1998).
  • Barr, A., and MacKinnon, D.P. Designated driving among college students. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 1998, 59(5), 549-554.
  • Berardelli, P. Safe Young Drivers: A Guide for Parents and Teens. Vienna, VA: Nautilus Communications, 2000.
  • Brookhuis, K. A., et al. The effects of mobile telephoning on driving performance. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 1991, 23(4), 309-316.
  • Butterworth, F. Many Undetected, Use Drugs and Then Drive, Report Says. New York Times, November 15, 2002, A20.
  • Catchpole, J. Why are Young Drivers Over-Represented in Traffic Accidents? Vermont, South, Victoria, Australia: Australian Road Research Board, 1994.
  • Caudill, B.D., et al. DWI prevention: Profiles of drivers who use designated drivers. Addictive Behaviors, 2001, 26(2), 155.
  • Connelly, J. Cellular phones can distract you to death. Seattle Post-Intelligencer, July 16, 2003.
  • DeJong, W., and Winstein, J.A. The use of designated drivers by U.S. college students: A national study. Journal of American College Health, 1999, 47(4), 151.
  • Dolliver, M. Mothers Against Drunk Driving. Adweek: New England Advertising Week, 1998 (Nov. 16), 35(46), 50. [Reports that Mothers Against Drunk Driving ad equating having a drink with snorting cocaine may be counterproductive.]
  • Donelson, , A. C., et al. The Role of Alcohol in Fatal Traffic Crashes: British Columbia. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Traffic Safety Research Foundation, 1989.
  • Don't Dial and Drive. San Francisco Chronicle, Feb. 14, 1997, p. A26.
  • Drivers turning to a designated driver. New York Times, 1988 (December 31), 138, p. 6.
  • DUI Courts Website (American Council on Alcoholism),
  • Duncan, D. F. Chronic drinking, binge drinking, and drunk driving. Psychological Reports, 1987, 80(2), 681.
  • Facts about drowsy driving. The Peer Educator, 2000, 23(4), 9 & 14. To learn more, visit
  • Fest, G. A recall to renumber. Adweek, 1999 (June 7), 20(123), 3. [The ad agency that provided free ads for Mothers Against Drunk Driving changed some of its ads because MAD had provided erroneous statistics to the agency. The action followed publication of an article by two alcohol abuse experts in The Wall Street Journal exposing the false claims. Mothers Against Drunk Driving had taken the statistics from the Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse (a.k.a. The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University). However, CASA's claims had been exposed as unsubstantiated several years earlier in a well-known article and were widely-known as false by those in the alcohol abuse prevention field.]
  • Frisbie, T. Talking mobile. Traffic Safety, 1991, 91(2), 26-28.
  • Gary, S. L. S., et al. Consideration of driver home county prohibition and alcohol-related vehicle crashes. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 2003, 35(5), 641-648.
  • Hans, M. Innovative programs target young drivers. Traffic Safety, 1996, 96(5), 6-9.
  • Hans, M. Graduated licensing: training wheels for young drivers. Traffic Safety, 1996, 96(2), 6-9.
  • Hansen, W. B., and Graham, J. W. Preventing alcohol, marijuana and cigarette use among adolescents. Preventive Medicine, 1991, 20.
  • Hanson, D. J. Preventing Alcohol Abuse: Alcohol, Culture and Control. Westport, CT: Praeger, 1995, chapter 3.
  • Hanson, D. J. Alcohol Education: What We Must Do. Westport, CT: Praeger, 1996.
  • How Effective Are MADD's Efforts? USA Today, 1992, 120, 4.
  • Johnson, E. Cheers to the designated driver. Safety & Health, 1995, 152(6), 76-80.
  • Joseph, J. Are Breath Tests Accurate: Defense Lawyers Often Challenge Their Use as Evidence, And Win. [Can be found at]
  • Kinkade, P. T. The Unintended Consequences of California's 1982 Drunk Driving Laws: The Costs of Being "MADD." (Irvine, CA: University of California, Ph.D. dissertation, 1990).
  • Kinkade, P., et al. Probation and the drunk driver: a cost of being "MADD." (mandatory sentencing for drunk drivers promoted by Mothers Against Drunk Driving not effective alone) Federal Probation, 1992, 56(2), 6-15.
  • Lopez, F. MADD agenda goes mad with neo-prohibitionism. The Atlanta Journal and Constitution, 3-25-02.
  • Lundegaard, Karen. DWI court treatment programs in U.S. show signs of helping drunk drivers to sober up. Wall street Journal, 4-7-04, pp. B1-B2.
  • McGwin, G. Characteristics of traffic crashes among young, middle-aged, and older drivers. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 1999, 31(3), 181-198.
  • McKnight, A. J., and McKnight, A. S. The effect of cellular phone use upon driver inattention. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 1993, 25(3), 259-265.
  • Miller, H. Soft drink has no wine, but plenty of cheer. Advertising Age, 1992 (June 1), 63(22), 3-4. [Cheerwine is a non-alcoholic soft drink that has been marketed in Southern states for 75 years. However, Mothers Against Drunk Driving objects to both the name and the fact that the soft drink's market includes those under the age of 21.]
  • Moulden, J. V. Alcohol Education: A Long-Term Strategy for Preventing Transportation Accidents. In: Benjamin, T. (Ed.). London and New York: Royal Society of Medicine Services, 1987.
  • National Hardcore Drunk Driving Project (
  • National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. A Guide to Developing a Community-Based Designated Driver Program. U.S. Department of Transportation.
  • National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Designated Driver, Safe Ride Program Community Action Guide. Washington, DC: NHTSA, 2001.(
  • Pariser, J. L. In vino Veritas: the truth about blood alcohol presumption in state drunk driving laws. New York Law Review, 1989, 64(1), 141-181.
  • Peach, R. J. Who tests the DUI test? Defense can't; New Jersey won't let lawyers inspect new breath tests. The National Law Journal, 2000, 23(6), A4.
  • Pena, C.V. The Anti-Drunk Driving Campaign: A Covert War Against Drinking.
  • Petica, S. Risks of cellular phone usage in the car and its impact on road safety. Recherche-Transports-Securite, 1993, 37, 45-56.
  • Rawls, Eben. The Intoxilyzer isn’t perfect: Judges in DWI trials must stand for justice despite pressure from public. Charlotte Observer, August 20, 2004.
  • Redelmeier, D. A., and Tibshirani, R. J. Association between cellular telephone calls anc motor vehicle collisions. New England Journal of Medicine, 1997, 336(7).
  • Reinerman, C. Social Movements and Social Policy: “Mothers Against drunk driving,” Restrictive Alcohol Laws and Social Control in the 1980s. Berkekey, CA: Alcohol Research Group, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, 1985.
  • Rosenblum. E. Breathlayzer machines are faulted once more. New Jersey Law Journal, 1988, 122(23), 5.
  • Ross, H. L. Confronting Drunk Driving. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1992.
  • Sargeant, G. Breathalyzer accuracy challenged. Trial, 1989, 25(12), 22.
  • Simpson, H. M., and Mayhew, D. R. The Hard Core Drinking Driver. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Traffic Safety Research Foundation, 1991.
  • Spierer, E. Young Drivers and Alcohol: Educational Measures and Programmes. In: Benjamin, T. (Ed.). Young Drivers Impaired by Alcohol and Other Drugs. London and New York: Royal Society of Medicine Services, 1987. Pp. 227-235.
  • Sundeem, M. Cell Phones and Highway Safety: 2002 State Legislatures Update. Denver, CO: National Council of State Legislatures.
  • Taylor, L. Drunk Driving Defense. New York: Aspen Law and Business, 5th edition, 2000. [This is the best single source of information on breathalyzer accuracy and inaccuracy.]
  • Taylor, L. Nonspecific Analysis. From Taylor, L. Drunk Driving Defense. New York: Aspen Law and Business, 5th edition, 2000. Can be found at
  • Treatment advocates try to extend drug court success to DUI offenders. Alcoholism & Drug Abuse Weekly, 1999, 11(35), 1.
  • Ulrich, D. Mothers Against Drunk Driving. Adweek: New England Advertising Week, 1998 (Aug. 17), 22. [Argues that new Mothers Against Drunk Driving ad campaign equating impaired drivers with cold-blooded murders may not be credible or effective.]
  • U.S. Department of Transportation. A Guide to Developing a Community-Based Designated Driver Program (
  • Violanti, J. M., et al. Cellular phones and traffic safety. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 1996, 28, 265-270.
  • Weed, F.J. Grass-roots activism and the drunk driving issue: A survey of MADD chapters. Law & Policy, 1987, 9(3), 259-278.
  • Wells-Parker, E., et al. Self-efficacy and motivation for controlling drinking and drinking/driving: an investigation of changes across a Driving Under the Influence (DUI) intervention program and of recidivism prediction. Addictive Behaviors, 2000, 25(2), 229.
  • Williams, A. F. Drugs in fatally injured young male drivers. Public Health Reports, 1985, 100(1), 19-25.
  • Williams, T. P. The Relative Role of Alcohol as a Contributing Factor in the Over-Representation of Young Drivers in Highway Crashes. Albany, NY: New York State Division of Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse, Bureau of Alcohol and Highway Safety, 1981.
  • Winfree Jr, L.T. and Giever, D.M. On classifying driving-while-intoxicated offenders: The experience of a citywide DWI drug court. Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000, 28(1), 13.
  • Wooster, M.M. Mothers Against Drunk Driving: Has its vision become blurred? Alternatives in Philanthropy, 2000 (February) (
  • Wright, Gary L. and Alexander, Ames. Treatment court praised: Judges with low conviction rates and drivers say recovery priority. Charlotte Observer, August 9, 20004. [Article reports that Judge Jerome Leonard helped establish the Mecklenburg County DWI Treatment Court.
    People repeatedly convicted of DWI are selected for the treatment court. They're required to attend Alcoholics Anonymous meetings and outpatient treatment every week for a year. They are given weekly drug and alcohol tests and must return to court every month for a progress review.
    Mecklenburg court officials say the treatment court works. They say the re-arrest rate for drug offenders not involved in a treatment court is 67 percent. For participants in the DWI treatment court, the re-arrest rate is 11 percent.
    The DWI treatment court has won an award from the National Commission Against Drunk Driving, after being nominated by Mecklenburg's MADD chapter. This year, the National Drug Court Institute selected Mecklenburg's DWI treatment court as a model to host training for jurisdictions across the country planning to set up similar courts.]
  • Yi, H. Y., Williams, G. D., & Dufour, M. C. Trends in alcohol-related fatal crashes, United States, 1979–99. (Surveillance Report No. 56). Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse, 2001.
  • Zador, P. L., Krawchuk, S. A., & Voas, R. B. Alcohol-related relative risk of driver fatalities and driver involvement in fatal crashes in relation to driver age and gender: An update using 1996 data. Journal of Studies on Alcohol 61: 387–395.
  • Zimmerman, N. Breathalyzers do have a host of problems. The National Law Journal, 1984, 6, 12

This site does not dispense medical, legal, or any other advice and none should be inferred.
For more fine print, read the disclaimer.