In 2022, Texas was the state recording the highest volume of fatalities resulting from alcohol-impaired driving at ***** number of fatalities, followed by California, which reported around ***** fatalities from drunk driving. These two states alone, out of 51, account for nearly ********* of the total fatalities incurred by alcohol-impaired driving. The Golden state amounted to the largest share of motor vehicle registrations in the country in 2021.

Between 2017 and 2022, the number of reported cases of people driving under the influence of drugs was higher each year than people driving under the influence of alcohol in Sweden. Moreover, whereas the number of people reported driving under the influence of alcohol was between 11,000 and 12,000 from 2017 to 2019, it was below 10,000 the following years. In 2022, 12,000 cases of people driving under the influence of drugs were reported.

In 2024, authorities in Japan reported **** thousand accidents involving drunk driving. Fatal accidents are considerably more likely to occur when the motor vehicle driver is under the influence of alcohol.

Demographics among Past 30-Day Marijuana Users in Colorado and Washington.

Driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs (violating Article 35 of the Road Traffic Management Punishment Regulations) Gender Statistics

After falling from 2011 to 2015, the number of people in Denmark who were caught driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs increased, peaking at over ****** cases in 2020. This was the highest reported number in the period between 2007 and 2021. The number of reported cases fell slightly in 2021, dropping to ******. Of these, ***** resulted in a traffic accident. In Denmark, driving under the influence of alcohol with a permille of *** or more is illegal.

The graph presents DUI accident statistics in Missouri from 2013 to 2023. The x-axis represents the years from 2013 to 2023, while the y-axis shows the number of accidents involving alcohol and drugs separately. Alcohol-involved crashes range from a high of 5,234 incidents in 2013 to a low of 4,416 in 2022. Drug-involved crashes peaked at 1,134 in 2020 and reached their lowest point at 702 in 2022. The data reveals a general decline in both alcohol- and drug-related DUI crashes over the 11-year period, with notable decreases in 2022 for both categories.

In 2024, the authorities in Japan reported *** fatal accidents involving drunk driving, increasing from the previous year. Fatal accidents were several times as likely to occur when the motor vehicle driver was under the influence of alcohol.

The number of drunk driving offenses recorded by the police in Finland fluctuated over the period from 1960 to 2023. In 2023, approximately 15,900 drunken driving offenses were recorded. This was a decrease of roughly 209 from the previous year.

Indiana is apparently on track to legalize Sunday package sales of alcoholic beverages for carry out. One argument promulgated by enemies of Sunday sales is that permitting such sales would significantly increase DUI and vehicle-related deaths due to alcohol. This dataset is to partially investigate that question.

This data was compiled from individual state records at Foundation for Advancing Alcohol Responsibility (https://www.responsibility.org/get-the-facts/state-map/) and the US Census. It consists only of data for the year 2015. That is all that was available from the FAAR web site, as far as I know.

1. Data source: Road Safety Information Inquiry Network: Traffic accident statistics at a glance https://roadsafety.tw 2. Statistical conditions: All drivers (cars, motorcycles, power machinery, slow vehicles) drink-driving (exceeding 0.15mg by breath test) /L) accident, resulting in the number of deaths and injuries (including all drivers, passengers, and pedestrians affected by the incident).

Data Source: California Office of Traffic Safety

This data biography shares the how, who, what, where, when, and why about this dataset. We, the epidemiology team at Napa County Health and Human Services Agency, Public Health Division, created it to help you understand where the data we analyze and share comes from. If you have any further questions, we can be reached at epidemiology@countyofnapa.org.

Data dashboard featuring this data: https://data.countyofnapa.org/stories/s/abqu-wcty

Why was the data collected?  California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) ranking metric is a tool used to compare similarly sized cities on traffic safety statistics. A smaller the assigned number means that the city is ranked higher, and a higher ranking means the city has worse traffic safety compared to similar locations.

How was the data collected? Crash data comes from Statewide Traffic Records System (SWITRS). This system collects and processes data gathered from a collision scene. Population estimates come from California Department of Finance (DoF), which are based on changes in births, deaths, domestic migration, and international migration. Estimates are developed using aggregate data from a variety of sources, including birth and death counts provided by the Department of Public Health, driver's license data from the Department of Motor Vehicles, housing unit data from local governments, school enrollment data from the Department of Education, and federal income tax return data from the U.S. Internal Revenue Service. Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled (DVMT) come from California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The Traffic Data Branch at Caltrans estimates the number of vehicle miles that motorists traveled on California State Highways using a sampling of up to 20 traffic monitoring sites and reports on that data. Crash rankings are based on a ranking method that assigns statistical weights to categories including observed crash counts, population, and vehicle miles traveled. Counties are assigned statewide rankings, while cities are assigned population group rankings. DUI arrests data comes from the Department of Justice.

Who was included and excluded from the data & Where was the data collected? Data for the rankings is taken from Incorporated cities only. This includes local streets and state highways within city limits that share jurisdiction with the CHP. DUI arrest data is only available for cities that report it to the Department of Justice. Data from the OTS crash was sources specifically for Napa County, the City of Napa, American Canyon, Calistoga, St. Helena and Yountville.

When was the data collected? 2017-2022

Where can I learn more about this data? Office of traffic safety: https://www.ots.ca.gov/media-and-research/crash-rankings/ Methodology: https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/24410

Financial overview and grant giving statistics of Dui Assesments and Education Inc.

Ever driven in a car when you had been drinking alcohol, or been in a car driven by a friend who had been drinking (High School only) by sex, race/ethnicity, and grade, California Healthy Kids Survey, 2015-16METADATA:Notes (String): Lists table title, sourceYear (String): Year of surveyCategory (String): Lists the category representing the data: Santa Clara County is for total surveyed population, sex: Male and Female, race/ethnicity: African American, Asian/Pacific Islander, Latino and White (non-Hispanic White only) and grade level (9th, 11th, or non-traditional).Percent (Numeric): Percentage of high school students who have ever driven in a car when they had been drinking alcohol, or been in a car driven by a friend who had been drinking

Driving under the Influence Arrests reports the number and rate (per 10,000) of recorded DUI offenses, per age range.

These data measure the effects of blood alcohol content coupled with officer reports at the time of arrest on driving while intoxicated (DWI) case outcomes (jury verdicts and guilty pleas). Court records and relevant police reports for drunk-driving cases drawn from the greater metropolitan areas of Boston, Denver, and Los Angeles were compiled to produce this data collection. Cases were selected to include roughly equal proportions of guilty pleas, guilty verdicts, and not-guilty verdicts. DWI cases were compared on the quality and quantity of evidence concerning the suspect's behavior, with the evidence coming from any mention of 20 standard visual detection cues prior to the stop, 13 attributes of general appearance and behavior immediately after the stop, and the results of as many as 7 field sobriety tests. Questions concerned driving-under-the-influence cues (scoring sheet), observed traffic violations and actual traffic accidents, the verdict, DWI history, whether the stop resulted from an accident, whether the attorney was public or private, and sanctions that followed the verdict. Also included were demographic questions on age, sex, and ethnicity.

Descriptive Statistics and Reliability Analysis of Scales for Perceptions of Safety of Using Marijuana While Driving and Knowledge of Marijuana DUI Laws.

In 2021, *** Canadians were killed in a road crash that involved a drunk driver, the lowest number in the provided time interval. The number of people killed in road crashes due to drunk driving has, in general, declined from 1996 to 2021. This statistic illustrates the number of people killed in road crashes that involved drunk driving in Canada from 1996 to 2021.

Comprehensive population and demographic data for Dui Village

Background: The use of legal sanctions is often framed as a way to deter driving under the influence (DUI). Yet little research has assessed frequent drinkers’ knowledge of DUI penalties. Objectives: To assess the general public’s knowledge of DUI penalties (an important element of deterrence) in their state and factors associated with more accurate knowledge. Methods: This US-based cross-sectional study used data from a Connect Platform survey of adult drinkers (n = 583, 58.0% male, 41.4% female) that asked their beliefs on the usual DUI fine and jail time penalty in their state, and how much they expected to be charged if imprisoned (jail fee). Responses were compared with data on minimum/maximum DUI penalties that appear in state statutes pertaining to DUI. For fines, responses were considered accurate if within $100 of the penalty on statute, and for jail time, if they matched the penalty on statute. Regression models were used to assess respondent characteristics associated with accurate penalty knowledge. Results: Among respondents, 83.7% and 67.2% underestimated the minimum DUI fine and jail time penalty in their state, respectively, and 8.7% and 19.7% overestimated. Although 75.4% of respondents lived in a state that charged jail fees, less than half were aware of this. No demographic or characteristic was consistently associated with accurate penalty knowledge across regression models (p > .05). Conclusions: The majority of respondents underestimated the DUI penalty in their state and suggest that large-scale campaigns to educate the public on the severity of DUI penalties are warranted.