Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Mona Shield Payne / Special to the Sun
Nevada Highway Patrol troopers conduct cursory inspections while looking for impaired drivers Saturday evening at a DUI checkpoint on Rainbow Boulevard north of Cheyenne Avenue.
By Kyle B. Hansen (contact) 
Monday, Aug. 24, 2009 | 2:05 a.m.
In the 30 years since the fight against driving under the influence of alcohol began, a lot has changed and the number of drunken drivers has decreased. But some new trends are beginning to worry experts.
For Gary Urbantke, the fight against impaired drivers has been personal for 25 years.
Urbantke, once a Henderson police officer, was driving from Las Vegas to Henderson to pick his daughter up from school on July 16, 1984.
His wife and 5-year-old son were with him in the car when he saw a van coming straight at him — in his lane on the divided Boulder Highway near Russell Road.
The two cars collided at a combined speed of more than 100 mph.
Urbantke was knocked out and paralyzed. His wife was killed instantly and his son died four hours later at a hospital.
The other driver had only a broken leg. He was arrested, convicted and served 10 years in prison for the crash — two years less than the maximum allowed at the time for two counts of felony DUI.
Urbantke has since remarried and gone on with his life.
“But there isn’t a day goes by that I don’t think of both my wife and son, and it’s the same way for my daughter,” he said. “It’s something that will affect us for the rest of our lives.”
“We were fortunate in the fact that this man was tried, he was convicted and he did his time; a lot of people get off on technicalities.”
Urbantke has been lobbying for tougher DUI laws and has been trying to educate people about the dangers of impaired driving.
Since the crash, DUI laws across the nation and in Nevada have become stricter, with harsher penalties and lower blood-alcohol levels permitted.
But alcohol-related crashes still accounted for about 37 percent of Nevada traffic fatalities in 2008, a figure that has stayed virtually unchanged for more than a decade.
As an annual national campaign against driving under the influence kicked off Friday, two trends are particularly worrisome to law enforcement officials — the rise in people driving under the influence of drugs and the increase in the number of women driving under the influence.
--
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration organizes the annual crackdown on impaired driving to coincide with Labor Day. This year’s campaign began Friday and concludes Sept. 7.
It includes DUI checkpoints and $13 million in nationwide advertising to remind drivers that if they're under the influence, they will be arrested if caught.
“Drugged drivers, teens and impaired female drivers are the focus this Labor Day,” said Nevada Highway Patrol Sgt. Kevin Honea in a statement. “So much of our outreach centers on men under the influence of alcohol, but we can’t forget that impaired driving cuts across all segments of society.”
Southern Nevada law enforcement agencies also will be on the lookout for impaired drivers. Metro conducted a DUI checkpoint Saturday night near the intersection of Cheyenne Avenue and Rainbow Boulevard.
Metro says these types of events are part of stepped-up enforcement that has led to an increased number of arrests for impaired driving.
In 2003, Metro arrested 3,469 people on charges of driving under the influence. In 2007, that number jumped to 8,495.
During the same period, the number of DUI arrests nationwide decreased 1.4 percent.
While some of the increase was due to population growth — Clark County’s population jumped 14 percent during that time — Metro also credits its enforcement.
“Our last two sheriffs have said we’re going to put a stop to this,” Metro spokesman Bill Cassell said.
Metro accident investigator Bill Redfairn said Sheriff Doug Gillespie, as well as his predecessor, Bill Young, helped to make a difference.
Gillespie has “made a commitment, put resources into that, has increased the number of motor officers we’ve got and that gives us the opportunity to do more DUI enforcement,” Redfairn said.
--
One morning last July, Patricia Hoff and Porsche Hughes were sitting at a bus stop on Boulder Highway when Steven Murray drove into them, killing Hoff and seriously injuring Hughes.
Investigators later determined Murray was under the influence of the prescription drugs Percocet and Valium.
Murray was convicted of causing a death while under the influence of a controlled substance and of driving under the influence of a controlled substance resulting in an accident with fatality or bodily harm.
“It’s impacted every day in my life. I don’t have my mom there,” Hoff’s daughter Robin Wynkoop said recently.
The Murray case exemplifies what local and national authorities say is a growing trend of driving under the influence of drugs — both prescription and illicit.
“Over the years, we’ve seen an increase in the number of drugged drivers on our roads and highways commensurate with the substance abuse problems we have in our communities, including not only illicit drugs but prescription narcotics,” said Nevada Department of Public Safety Director Jerry Hafen at a news conference last week in Las Vegas.
In Nevada, 81 of the 187 deaths caused by impaired drivers in 2006 involved drugs, according to data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
While 33 of those deaths were from drivers who had used a combination of drugs and alcohol, 48 of the drivers had only drugs in their system.
Driving under the influence of drugs is included in the state’s DUI laws, and having a prescription for the drugs is not an accepted defense, said Bruce Nelson, a deputy district attorney with the vehicular crimes unit.
A Las Vegas Sun analysis of prescription narcotic consumption across the country between 1997 and 2006 revealed that Nevadans consume about twice the national average per capita of prescription narcotics.
In a nationwide study performed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, more than 16 percent of tested drivers were under the influence of drugs.
While that doesn't mean all of those drivers were impaired, more than 11 percent of the drivers in the survey tested positive for illicit drugs, five times as many as those who tested positive for alcohol.
“This should be a national wake-up call,” Gil Kerlikowske, director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, said at the Las Vegas news conference last week. “Given the impact and the success that we’ve had ... on alcohol-impaired driving, we should be able to devote the same level of attention and resources (to drugged driving).”
--
While the number of men charged with impaired driving dropped more than 14 percent nationwide from 2003 to 2007, the number of women arrested on DUI charges during that time increased 4.6 percent, according to data from the FBI. During the 10-year period that ended in 2007, the number of women charged with impaired driving increased nearly 30 percent, according to the same data.
In Las Vegas, the gender split has remained stable since 2002, when Metro first began tracking the gender of DUI arrests.
Since then, women have accounted for about 19 percent of the total DUI arrests each year. In 2003, Metro arrested 682 women for impaired driving, 19.6 of the total 3,469 arrests. In 2008, 1,551 women were arrested, about 18 percent of the 8,495 total.
While Metro’s numbers haven’t changed much, Nevada was one of 10 states identified by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration with an increase in the number of female alcohol-impaired drivers in fatal crashes last year, putting it on the priority list for this year’s DUI campaign.
Nelson also said he has seen an uptick in the severity of the cases that come across his desk at the District Attorney’s office.
“Some of our most serious — that is, highest alcohol level — drunk drivers have been women,” he said.
A case in recent weeks involved a woman whose blood alcohol level was .46, he said. The legal limit for blood alcohol is .08 percent.
“That should have killed her, but it didn’t,” Nelson said.
Part of the problem with an increase in women driving under the influence is that women are more likely to have children in the car, according to the administration’s data.
In February, 28-year-old Amanda Werber was driving 100 mph on U.S. 93 in Boulder City when she rear-ended another car, causing that car to flip and injuring two people.
Werber and her 18-month-old child, who was in the car with her, were not injured. She was charged with driving under the influence, reckless driving and child endangerment.
After pleading guilty to reckless driving resulting in bodily harm and child endangerment last Tuesday, Werber is scheduled to be sentenced in November.
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration study, about 35 percent of the alcohol-impaired female drivers had passengers with them.
Sandy Heverly, executive director of STOP DUI, said she has seen the effect that parents have on their children when they drive under the influence.
She was speaking at a junior high school when a girl asked if she should avoid riding in the car with her parents after they drink wine at dinner.
“I was just stunned by that (question),” she said. “And hand after hand after hand went up of kids that were put in that situation. And so I went from junior high to junior high to junior high and, oh my gosh, it was unbelievable because the majority of the kids in those classes were telling me that they were subjected to that type of a situation.”
For children who are in the car when a parent is arrested for driving under the influence, the experience can be traumatic, Heverly said.
If a parent is arrested for drunk driving and no other responsible adult can immediately be reached, the children are usually taken to Child Haven, the county’s emergency shelter for abused and neglected children.
The law does provide for stricter penalties for those who drive under the influence with children under the age of 15 in the car, Nelson said. And drivers with children in the car can be charged with child endangerment, a gross misdemeanor.
1 infraction and their license should be gone. amazing how we treat this subject.
drunk driving is not the only killer out there how about the drugged drivers that plage the road most of the time they live to go to court and most of them don't even realize that they took someones mom,wife,husband,dad,son,daughter,brother,sister and to the guy that objects to check points maybe you prefer being detained by the corner or the funeral home the only ones that object are the ones that have something to hide
Good article. Vehicular manslaughter is such a crap shoot. It's not just mac trucks anymore. Impaired women drivers are on the rise. I knew it. I would hope an education campaign might help the ones on the fringe, but any hardcore Motrin user would just sneer. Watch out for those using suppositories, as well. I wasn't shooting needles, I was just trying to kill beetles, but that toxic substance, can linger on your clothes etc. so any chemical can show up on your shoes, or in your bloodstream if you've been around it. Gardeners, beware.
Drunk driving is out of control. but I do not believe in roadblocks.
one thing we have noticed when we are over in vegas, people seem casual about drinking and driving, back in the UK it does not happen like that, people always say i am driving no thanks, yet in vegas something seems to happen and people dont seem so aware or bothered.
We live in both Vegas and UK and see the big difference...
it is not price nor availability it is something else... maybe the city buzzes people up..
markp, the difference is that in the UK you have to work to get your license. In the USA a driver's license is given to anyone that can get 70% of the questions right on a trivia quiz.
But remember, driving is a privilege, not a right.
Hah! I made a funny.
Lenny_V, tkporter -- with you guys on this one.
What part of "no unreasonable search and seizure without probable cause" do these people -- who all swore oaths to support that part of the Constitutions -- fail to understand? And who's going to hold them accountable for violating their oaths?
In other contexts the high courts call these warrantless searches "fishing expeditions." But more and more the courts have become just another expensive bureaucracy to get through. Their mission has always been to protect the rights of individuals. When and how did we allow them to abdicate that role?
Answer -- I remember a judge running for office on the platform of "the Sheriff, the DA and me, we're a team and we're tough on crime!" The worst part is he won the election.
For every tragic story like the Sun trotted out here are a hundred more showing police and the "just us" system off their leashes. Some of those should have been covered here for balance.
But, but, the ads on TV!
We're all depressed and need to be medicated!
Do you know why so many people die from drunk drivers? Your cars are made out of tin foil. They are trying to up-scale the drunk driving incidents but if you look at all of the statistics, 80% of the people that die on the road are not paying attention and driving in vehicles that are not safe in the first place. So, you hypocrites think we should give the corrupt and irresponsible police power to throw you in jail and take your license because you rinsed your mouth with mouthwash? Was there a problem in the 50's, 60's, 70's? How about that crippled guy who is on some sort of gimped out campaign to stop the craze... what a joke!!! I feel like I am taking crazy pills because all of you people act so sternly about the penalty but I bet every single one of you has gone to a bar , had a few drinks, and drove home just fine within the past year. If you say you didn't, I will just call you a liar anyway so don't bother.
This is why I have a problem with this entire scenario. You should not have to be penalized for a crime that did not happen. I have been bombed out of mind, had cops follow me, and drove home just fine many dozens of times. I do the speed limit, stop at the lights and signs, and stay off the phone. You people are all racing to get nowhere fast and that is the biggest threat to the drivers in the valley. To make all of you drones and do-gooder zombies feel better about yourselves, I think I will down a six pack at a bar tonight and go out for a drive. Will I be caught? No! There is nothing you, you cause, the police, or the army can do about it. God, its good to live free.
armaniangod, I do not drink alchohol at all, your comment that everyone has driven drunk in the past year is a lie. I hope the cops catch you before you kill somebody. Shame on you for your disrespect for the man who lost his family because a drunk thought like you do.
Go ahead Metro, set up the check points. We law abiding citizens don't mind a few minutes delay. If it does nothing else but prevent people to get in the car drunk for fear of the check point, it's serving it's purpose. Lenny, you say it's unconstitutional, If that was so, the courts would have stopped them by now. Here in Calif. they set up check points, usually catch 6 or 8 drunks, and also tow 50 or 60 cars whose drivers are unlicensed! I wish they did it more often. (No, I am not a Bible thumper, or LDS or such). Just a tax paying working guy.
Since it's a proven fact that there are far fewer drunk and drinking drivers now than there were 30 years ago, the only "changing trend" on which to report is the increase in fearmongering among those who have an ax to grind on this issue. Wouldn't it be refreshing to see people involved in working on this problem, who didn't lose a relative or otherwise have some kind of revenge jag going? Of course I feel badly for their loss, but their efforts all too often result in unconstitutional laws and bogus publicity stunts like sobriety checkpoints, none of which address the problem. How about some police experts and/or sociologists, so that we can be more sure of the neutrality of the research and intentions?
More sobriety check points and stricter sentencing. If an impaired driver kills someone there should be a minimum sentence of 20 years.
What about all of the people whacked out on some mind numbing drug their doctor gave them. So, I can take some xanax and go on a pleasure cruise legally. Then we get comments by Bakersfield and David Wayne that want people locked up forever... California laws, taxes, and thinking.
As a freedom lovin', gun ownin', gun totin', tax hatin', government hatin', God fearin' republican...........I really like these checkpoints !!!
armaniangod. I re-resd my comment. Nowhere did I use the term, or even imply "locked up forever". You must have already had that six pack today.
JerryWayne hasn't even posted, why are you quoting him? I believe the current thousands of dollars in fines and a day or 2 in jail for being caught DUI is appropriate, as is the substantial insurance cost increase. On the second such offense, it should be all of the above, maybe 30 days in jail and loss of license for no less than a year. If a DUI kills or causes very serious injury, I think 10-20 years in prison is reasonable. I've driven through Check points in Calif. Nevada and Nebraska, Just showed my license, answered a simple question or 2 and was on my way. Hardly the "unlawful seaarch or detainment" so many drunks seem to think it is. If you're going to boast about driving while being "bombed out of mind" you should expect the sane people out there to have a problem with it.
I forget who said it, maybe it was comdeian Steven Wright, but the quote goes " If drunk driving is illegal then why do bars have parking lots?"
What about the children?
"What about the children?"
theCanimalsHusband -- right! The children should not be allowed to drink and drive, either!
Wait till obamas civil army comes to a town near you!