Cuevas 1

Jorge Cuevas

Professor McCann

English 1302 203

4 March 2022

The Policy of Alcohol and its Effect on Drunk Driving

The global crisis on the policy of alcohol has been a controversial topic that has caused

differing opinions. Many will agree that alcohol is a leading cause of drunk driving.

Additionally, many more will then claim that there should be restrictions implemented to avoid

this crisis. However, stating an opinion on a global issue is completely different than committing

the action towards actually preventing it. Multiple types of researchers have stated their opinion

on the matter at hand and discussed what could be adjusted to solve the policy of alcohol and its

effect on drunk driving. Nevertheless, this research analysis provides several key points that

highlight what sort of agreements, disagreements, arguments, and limitations researchers have

stated about the policy of alcohol-associated with drunk driving.

Agreements

Most authors agreed that alcohol was a leading cause of drunk driving accidents.

Furthermore, they also stated that restrictions and regulations should be implemented to control

traffic accidents. For example, Rehm et al. discussed different risk factors such as advertisement

bans, an increase in age purchasing requirements, and legislation on drunk driving (655).

Additionally, Rehm et al. conducted an experiment that measured how crashes and deaths on the

road were associated with alcohol involvement and how it was acquired (657). As an emphasis,

the authors decided to tackle similar issues that all concern the same conflict (Rehm et al. 656-

657). Moreover, to prevent drunk driving accidents, Anund et al. hypothesized how new
 Cuevas 2

technologies could reduce the number of under the influence catastrophes and how it can be

implemented as a law (336). To address their hypothesis, Anund et al conducted a study that

discussed the impacts of a new vehicle-based system used for alcohol detection (337). Likewise,

the authors claimed that these innovations could be seen in the near future, and information

concerning the topic could revolutionize how drunk driving is evaluated (Anund et al. 337-340).

Put it another way, both authors discussed how the policy and prevention of alcohol on drunk

driving could be revolutionized for the better. In addition, each claim made by the authors

enhances their overall goal to improve implications that could be seen to decrease traffic

accidents. All in all, both groups of authors described their opinion on a global crisis and

conducted experiments that concluded how drunk driving could supposedly witness a decrease

soon.

Disagreements

On the contrary, while many authors’ claims have supported the goal to prevent drunk

driving tragedies, others have stated setbacks concerning alcohol and driving under the influence.

For instance, Kaufman and Wiebe elaborated on the impacts that interlock laws had on alcohol-

involved crashes and how society reacted to them (865). As an emphasis, the authors stated that

interlocks were a system of devices that would be added to vehicles that would be able to tell the

alcohol in the blood system of the individual (Kaufman and Wiebe 865-866). Through their

discussion, Kaufman and Wiebe asserted that interlock laws are not mandatory in all states

resulting in an unbalance of traffic accidents (866-867). Consequently, many were in

disagreement with the implementation of interlock devices in their vehicles, and because of large

protests, the laws were never made mandatory in certain states (Kaufman and Wiebe 868-869).

Moreover, to add to the debate, Sylvester and Markel-Haider further analyzed the reasons
 Cuevas 3

concerning why interlock laws are not mandatory all over the United States (491). The authors

began by mentioning how other factors such as increased taxes, political viewpoints, and

interlock policies all contribute to the neglect of implementing interlock laws (Sylvester and

Merkel-Haider 491-492).
 Cuevas 4

Works Cited

Andrea, Timothy. “The Exigencies of Drunk Driving: Cripps v. State and the Issues with Taking

Drivers' Blood Without a Warrant.” Electronic Supplement, vol. 59, no. 9, 22 May 2018, pp.

482-498.

Andrews, Jessica, et al. “A ‘Hands on’ Public Service Program to Help People Stay Sober and Safer on

the Roadway.” Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 19, 3 Oct. 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/su131910979.

Accessed 7 Mar. 2022.

Anund, Anna, et al. “Stakeholders’ Opinions on a Future In-Vehicle Alcohol Detection System for

Prevention of Drunk Driving.” Traffic Injury Prevention, vol. 16, no. 4, Dec. 2014, pp. 336-344,

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15389588.2014.940579. Accessed 7 Mar. 2022.

Kaufman, Elinore J., and Wiebe, Douglas J. “Impact of State Ignition Interlock Laws on Alcohol-

Involved Crash Deaths in the United States.” AJPH Research, vol. 106, no. 5, May 2016, pp.

865-871.

Rehm, Jürgen, et al. “Alcohol control policy and changes in alcohol-related traffic harm.” Addiction,

vol. 115, no. 4, Apr. 2020, pp. 655-665, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31475395/. Accessed 7

Mar. 2022.

Sylvester, Steven M., and Markel-Haider, Donald P. “Buzz Kill: State Adoption of DUI Interlock Laws,

2005–11.” The Policy Studies Journal, vol. 44, no. 4, 2016, pp. 491-509.