once in a lifetime, and imposed mandatory prison sentences, license revocation and community service for repeat offenders.
The state has also passed laws suspending driver’s licenses for those who receive DUI arrests in another state; added penalties for individuals driving with blood-alcohol content (BAC) of .16 or above; and provided for the seizure or forfeiture of vehicles for repeat offenders who drive illegally during their suspension periods.
Last year, Illinois became one of only a handful of states requiring first-time DUI offenders to install Breath Alcohol Ignition Interlocks (BAIID) in their vehicles in order to continue driving while their licenses are suspensed. BAIID is a small breathalyzer installed on the dashboard of a vehicle to measure a person’s BAC. Blowing a .025 BAC or higher prevents the car from starting. Once a vehicle is started, a person is free to drive; however subsequent blows are required along the way. The ignition interlock replaces the Judicial Driving Permit that allowed offenders to drive only during specific hours.
Prior to the 2009 law, approximately 3,000 devices were installed on vehicles driven by repeat offenders. Now there are more than 5,000 devices installed on vehicles. “This was huge,” says Susan McKeigue, MADD Illinois executive director, adding that 50 to 75 percent of the DUI offenders continue driving after their arrests. “With the BAIID, our roads are much safer.”
According to Susan McKinney, IDOT’s BAIID administrator, studies show that recidivism is reduced by 81 percent while the device is on an offender’s vehicle, but decreases to 62 percent once it is removed. “We definitely believe that the BAIID devices help modify behaviors, which in turn prevents fatalities,” she stated.
But passing laws is only one piece of the puzzle. Enforcement is another. And police officers are indeed enforcing the laws. Each year, approximately 50,000 people are arrested by state and local authorities for driving under the influence in Illinois, and on average 2,560 teens lose their driver’s licenses through the state’s “Use It and Lose It” law, which imposes lengthy suspensions for underage drinkers with even a trace of alcohol in their systems.
Statistics show that most DUI offenders have a BAC of about .16 – twice the legal limit – at the time of the arrest, and 80 percent of those arrested are first-time offenders.
At least it is the first time they have been caught. According to MADD, by the time a person receives the first DUI arrest, he or she has driven drunk more than 80 times.
The Illinois State Police reports 9,702 DUI arrests in 2008. In 2009 the number of arrests increased to 9,996. The Springfield Police Department shows 375 DUI arrests in 2008, and 396 arrests in 2009.
MADD, as well as ISP officials, said that the increase in arrests is not the result of more people driving drunk, but it is largely due to police departments assigning officers who solely focus on drinking and driving and roadside checks. The Springfield Police Department (SPD) currently has two DUI officers, while the Sangamon County Sheriff’s Department has one.
Another key factor in reducing DUI fatalities is in the hands of the courts. Following the arrests it is up to state’s attorneys and judges to ensure that offenders pay a price. Some say that in the past the judicial system fell short, with prosecutors too quick to allow defendants to plead guilty to charges other than DUI, which have less of an impact on a person’s driving record.
Pryor, whose son Timothy died in a DUI accident, says when he began working to end drunk driving there were some obvious disparities in the way the law was applied. “I noticed that law enforcement was doing its job. But there were conflicts with the judicial system,” says Pryor. “Some judges appeared to be partial to some defendants. Others didn’t feel that drunk driving was a prisonable offense. But judges are coming around, holding offenders accountable for their actions. Plus, the state has passed laws mandating prison time for repeat offenders.”
While tough penalties are important in the fight to end drinking and driving, Pryor believes that prison is not always the best answer. He and his wife, Mary, believed this to be the case in their son’s death. The two wrote victim impact statements requesting that Steven, the driver and their son’s best friend, be sent to boot camp. “We wanted him to understand that underage drinking is serious and has hurtful consequences. We wanted him to get control of his life, and we didn’t believe that prison would help him do that,” Pryor explained.
The judge denied the request, sentencing him instead to three and one half years in prison. The Pryors appealed to the state’s attorney, who convinced the judge to grant the family’s request and to send Steven to boot camp. The Department of Corrections, however, denied Steven’s entrance into the boot camp program because it does not accept people responsible for the death of others. Steven served three years in prison.
Forging ahead Despite stricter laws and penalties, some believe it’s unlikely that drunk driving will completely end; therefore, the focus is to get as many drunk drivers off the road as possible.
The key is for legislators, law enforcement
continued on page 16
