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.

The counts of arrests are derived from information transmitted from law enforcement agencies to the Division of Criminal Justice Services Computerized Criminal History database for fingerprintable offenses.An adult arrest is defined as an arrest of a person 16 years old or older or a juvenile offender prosecuted in adult court. Fingerprintable offenses (defined in Criminal Procedure Law §160.10) include any felony, a misdemeanor defined in the penal law, a misdemeanor defined outside the penal law which would constitute a felony if such a person had a previous judgment of conviction for a crime, or loitering for the purpose of engaging in prostitution as defined in subdivision two of Penal Law §240.37.

There were over 7.55 million arrests for all offenses in the United States in 2023. This figure is a decrease from 1990 levels, when the number of arrests was over 14.1 million. Arrest rate in the U.S. Along with the declining number of arrests, the arrest rate for all offenses in the United States has also decreased since 1990, from 5691.6 arrests per 100,000 of the population down to 2232.1 per 100,000 in 2023. Additionally, South Dakota had the highest arrest rate in the country in 2023 while Massachusetts had the lowest. High numbers of arrests and unsolved crimes A high number of arrests does not necessarily correlate to a high number of solved cases, and in the U.S., many cases remain unsolved. The crime clearance rate, or rate of closed cases, was less than half for violent crimes in the U.S., and less than 20 percent for property crimes.

DISCLAIMER: This chart may be based on preliminary information that has not yet been verified and may be changed at a later date due to additional investigation. Additionally, the data entry process may include mechanical and/or human errors. Therefore, the Vermont State Police does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or correct sequencing of the information provided in this chart.

SUMMARY: This chart contains information related to arrests for driving under the influence involving a crash by year as recorded by the Vermont State Police between January 1, 2013 and the previous month. These data are extracted from the Vermont State Police records management system on a monthly basis. This chart is made available in an effort to enhance the transparency of law enforcement activities in Vermont. Should you have questions about this chart, please contact Scott Waterman at the Vermont State Police (802-241-5312 | scott.waterman@vermont.gov). If you have questions about the underlying dataset, please contact the specific law enforcement agency as they are each responsible for their own records. To access a summary page of this dataset, select the “About” tab on the right side of this page and scroll down to the attachments and click on the PDF document.

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.

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.

Objective: The objective of this study was to examine the effects of changes to Washington State’s alcohol ignition interlock laws: moving issuance of interlock orders from the courts to the driver licensing department (July 2003); extending the interlock order requirement to all persons convicted of driving under the influence (DUI; June 2004); allowing an interlock in lieu of an administrative driver’s license suspension (January 2009); and requiring proof of interlock installation to reinstate the driver’s license (January 2011). Method: Trends in conviction types, interlock installation rates, and 2-year cumulative recidivism rates were examined for first-time and repeat offenders with convictions stemming from DUI arrests during 1999–2012. Autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) models examined the association between law changes and installation rates, law changes and recidivism rates, and installation rates and recidivism rates. Results: During the study period, there was a large increase in the proportion of first-time DUI arrests reduced to alcohol-related negligent/reckless driving convictions, offenses not requiring interlock orders. The interlock installation rate increased substantially and the recidivism rate declined substantially among both first and repeat offenders. Based on the ARIMA models for first offenders, the 2004 and 2009 law changes were associated with increased interlock installation rates and lower recidivism rates. For first offenders arrested during the last quarter of 2012, the model estimates a 26% reduction in the recidivism rate (from an expected 7.7% without the 4 laws to 5.6%). A 1 percentage point increase in the interlock installation rate was associated with a 0.06 percentage point decline in the recidivism rate among first offenders. If the association carried forward and if the installation rate had been 100% rather than 38% in the last quarter of 2012, the 2-year recidivism rate would have been reduced from 5.6 to 2%. Among repeat offenders, the 2003 and 2009 law changes were associated with increased interlock installation rates, and the 2009 law change was associated with a nonsignificant decline in recidivism. Conclusions: In Washington, rates of interlock installations increased as interlock laws were strengthened, and the increase was associated with reductions in recidivism among first DUI offenders. Washington’s experience suggests that states can reduce DUI recidivism by requiring interlock orders for all offenders, allowing offenders to install interlocks in lieu of an administrative driver’s license suspension, and closing statutory loopholes that allow plea reductions to convictions without interlock orders.

In 2021, Ontario and British Columbia were the provinces that had the largest number of alcohol-related federal impaired driving charges in Canada, at approximately **** and **** thousand respectively. They were followed by Québec and Alberta, both of which had more than ***** thousand federal impaired driving charges.

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

DISCLAIMER: This chart may be based on preliminary information that has not yet been verified and may be changed at a later date due to additional investigation. Additionally, the data entry process may include mechanical and/or human errors. Therefore, the Vermont State Police does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or correct sequencing of the information provided in this chart.

SUMMARY: This chart contains information related to arrests for driving under the influence involving a crash by county and gender as recorded by the Vermont State Police between January 1, 2013 and the previous month. These data are extracted from the Vermont State Police records management system on a monthly basis. This chart is made available in an effort to enhance the transparency of law enforcement activities in Vermont. Should you have questions about this chart, please contact Scott Waterman at the Vermont State Police (802-241-5312 | scott.waterman@vermont.gov). If you have questions about the underlying dataset, please contact the specific law enforcement agency as they are each responsible for their own records. To access a summary page of this dataset, select the “About” tab on the right side of this page and scroll down to the attachments and click on the PDF document.

The Jail Bookings Open Data dataset is provided by the King County Department of Adult and Juvenile Detention. The dataset contains adult jail bookings which have occurred within the last twelve months; specific dates are indicated on the web site.

The data provided is a snapshot and is current as of the date and time it was extracted from the jail management systems. Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of data listed at the time of extraction. Updates, corrections, and additions may have occurred since the extraction date and time.

This dataset provides information associated with the booking of an individual into a King County jail facility, and not with any court cause, case, or criminal filing pursuant to the booking event. This information does not reflect the criminal history or criminal status of any inmate currently or previously in custody.

Current information about a specific booking event can be obtained by calling the Department of Adult and Juvenile Detention at (206) 296-1234 or by visiting our Jail Inmate Lookup Service (JILS). http://ingress.kingcounty.gov/inmatelookup/

View arrest details and search by State Police division, date, location, type of offense, and more.

This dataset provides the public with arrest information from the Montgomery County Central Processing Unit (CPU) systems. The data presented is derived from every booking; criminal, civil and motor vehicle entered through CPU. The data is compiled by “CRIMS”, a respected jail records-management system used by the Montgomery County Corrections and many other law enforcement agencies. To protect arrestee’s privacy, personal information is redacted. Residential addresses are rounded to the nearest hundred block. All data is refreshed on 2 hour basis to reflect any additions or changes. -Information that may include mechanical or human error -Arrest information [Note: all arrested persons are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law - Records will be removed after 30 days. Update Frequency - every 2 hours

*This data is updated nightly from the Police Reporting Server housed at the ECC every day at 11:59PM.Arrest data contains information on people taken into custody by City of Charlottesville police officers. More serious crimes such as felony offenses are more likely to result in an arrest. However, arrests can occur as a result of other offenses, such as parole violations or a failure to appear for trial.This dataset only contains information reported by City of Charlottesville Police. It does not contain information about incidents that solely involve other police departments operating within the city (for example, University of Virginia police or Albemarle County police).

This dataset contains Crime and Safety data from the Cary Police Department.

This data is extracted by the Town of Cary's Police Department's RMS application. The police incidents will provide data on the Part I crimes of arson, motor vehicle thefts, larcenies, burglaries, aggravated assaults, robberies and homicides. Sexual assaults and crimes involving juveniles will not appear to help protect the identities of victims.

This dataset includes criminal offenses in the Town of Cary for the previous 10 calendar years plus the current year. The data is based on the National Incident Based Reporting System (NIBRS) which includes all victims of person crimes and all crimes within an incident. The data is dynamic, which allows for additions, deletions and/or modifications at any time, resulting in more accurate information in the database. Due to continuous data entry, the number of records in subsequent extractions are subject to change. Crime data is updated daily however, incidents may be up to three days old before they first appear.

About Crime Data

The Cary Police Department strives to make crime data as accurate as possible, but there is no avoiding the introduction of errors into this process, which relies on data furnished by many people and that cannot always be verified. Data on this site are updated daily, adding new incidents and updating existing data with information gathered through the investigative process.

This dynamic nature of crime data means that content provided here today will probably differ from content provided a week from now. Additional, content provided on this site may differ somewhat from crime statistics published elsewhere by other media outlets, even though they draw from the same database.

Withheld Data

In accordance with legal restrictions against identifying sexual assault and child abuse victims and juvenile perpetrators, victims, and witnesses of certain crimes, this site includes the following precautionary measures: (a) Addresses of sexual assaults are not included. (b) Child abuse cases, and other crimes which by their nature involve juveniles, or which the reports indicate involve juveniles as victims, suspects, or witnesses, are not reported at all.

Certain crimes that are under current investigation may be omitted from the results in avoid comprising the investigative process.

Incidents five days old or newer may not be included until the internal audit process has been completed.

This data is updated daily.

The Jail Bookings Open Data dataset is provided by the King County Department of Adult and Juvenile Detention. The dataset contains adult jail bookings which have occurred within the last twelve months; specific dates are indicated on the web site.

The data provided is a snapshot and is current as of the date and time it was extracted from the jail management systems. Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of data listed at the time of extraction. Updates, corrections, and additions may have occurred since the extraction date and time.

This dataset provides information associated with the booking of an individual into a King County jail facility, and not with any court cause, case, or criminal filing pursuant to the booking event. This information does not reflect the criminal history or criminal status of any inmate currently or previously in custody.

Current information about a specific booking event can be obtained by calling the Department of Adult and Juvenile Detention at (206) 296-1234 or by visiting our Jail Inmate Lookup Service (JILS). http://ingress.kingcounty.gov/inmatelookup/

Men above the age of ** were more likely to be injured in a drink-driving-related road accident in 2019, especially those in the age group ** to **, in which male casualties were more than double the number of female casualties. Both *** boys and girls aged 15 years old or younger were injured in drink-driving accidents.