Incapacitating the DUI offender; Dealing with the NoCar

Perhaps the most significant limit on the effectiveness of vehicle interlocks is the failure of current programs to motivate more than a small fraction of eligible offenders to enroll in an interlock program. A major factor in that problem is the ability of offenders to deny that they own a vehicle. This paper discusses a method for providing an alternate control system that, being less desirable for the offender, should increase the proportion of convicted impaired drivers in interlock programs. Driving-while-suspended (DWS) is a major factor in limiting the effectiveness of license revocation on the impaired driving of motorists convicted of driving-under-the-influence (DUI) (DeYoung, Peck, & Helander, 1997). Installing an alcohol interlock on the vehicle of DUI offenders substantially reduces recidivism by 50 % or more while it is installed on the vehicle (Willis, Lybrand, & Bellamy, 2004). Offenders resist the installation of such units, however, preferring to risk driving while suspended (Voas, 2001). Consequently, the criminal justice system has been unable to motivate more than about 10 % of first and multiple DUI offenders eligible for the interlock to install the units (Voas & Marques, 2003). A major factor in the court