The Impaired Dual System Framework of United States Drunk-Driving Law: How International Perspectives Yield More Sober Results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
I. INTRODUCTION II. UNITED STATES' DUAL METHODS OF PROOF IN DRINKING AND DRIVING PROSECUTIONS A. The Highly Subjective, Misplaced Field Sobriety Testing System 1. General Problems with Field Sobriety Testing System 2. Specific Problems with Standardized Field Sobriety Tests 3. Specific Problems with Nonstandardized Field Sobriety Tests B. The Fledgling, Yet Promising .08 Per Se Statutory System 1. Tolerable Problems with Breathalyzer Machines 2. Lenient Punishment for Refusing a Breath Test. III. INTERNATIONAL, COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF DRUNK-DRIVING LAWS IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES A. The Limited Involvement of International Organizations B. Why United States' System is Impaired: Field Sobriety Tests and Ineffective Enforcement of Per Se Laws C. Scandinavia: The Very Strict Founding Father D. Great Britain: The Current Leader in Strict Enforcement E. Australia: Enforcement and Federalism Can Coexist F. Canada: Putting Field Sobriety Tests Where They Belong IV. CONCLUSION I. INTRODUCTION Throughout world, alcohol is regarded as both bringer of elation and discontent, as [n]o other substance has been so lauded in verse and song or criticized so frequently as has alcohol. (1) Countries have developed a kind of ambivalence towards alcohol because of dualistic nature of its exaltation and regulation. (2) While alcohol historically posed no great threat to communities, (3) its devastating effects have become increasingly apparent as an international catastrophe. (4) Impaired driving is a grave and serious international dilemma that results in countless casualties all over (5) Despite these tragic consequences, [t]he incidence of driving while under influence of alcohol is one of most frequently committed crimes throughout world. (6) In Great Britain, sixteen percent of total road deaths are caused by drunk drivers, (7) while in Ontario, Canada, over 12,000 drunk-driving accidents occur in a single year. (8) The European Commission contends that in its member countries, up to twenty percent of road accident deaths and serious injuries are attributable to alcohol and amount to an estimated loss of life of ten billion euros per year. (9) In United States, of 42,815 total traffic fatalities that occurred in 2002, forty-one percent were alcohol related. (10) In 2002, 258,000 people were injured in alcohol-related crashes. (11) Motor vehicle accidents where driver is impaired by alcohol cost employers over nine billion dollars a year. (12) Statistics like these, along with lobbying of public interest groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) (13) and Students Against Drunk Driving (SADD), have resulted in the almost schizophrenic development of drinking-and-driving in United States that is aimed at achieving fast and arguably haphazard prosecutions and convictions of those charged with drunk-driving offenses. (14) According to National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), resolving this problem requires cooperation of law enforcement, courts, and medical professionals to assist prosecutors in convicting alleged offenders. (15) The effect is that most states have two entirely different methods of prosecution to prove offense of Driving While Intoxicated (DWI). (16) This system is not only confusing for jury and unfair to criminal defendant, but it is also untenable. (17) One method of proof, consisting primarily of evidence from field sobriety tests, is subjective. (18) and inaccurate, (19) while other method of proof--breath, blood, or urine tests--cannot be properly implemented. (20) Drunk drivers create a very serious social (21) and international (22) problem that needs to be corrected. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".