Alcohol Trade Group Rails Against DUI Checkpoints

At first glance, it looks like another case of the pot calling the kettle black. Just ahead of the winter holiday season, which tends to consist of more driving and increased drinking, the American Beverage Insitute (ABI) put out a press release calling for an end to sobriety checkpoints.

"Sobriety checkpoints are expensive, ineffective at catching drunk drivers, and target moderate drinkers instead of the root cause of today's drunk driving problem--hard core alcohol abusers," ABI managing director Sarah Longwell said in the release.

ABI is a trade organization representing restaurants and other establishments that serve alcohol.

A study conducted by the US Centers for Disease Control suggests checkpoints, in which drivers along major routes are stopped for sobriety checks (usually a random sample, such as every fifth vehicle), are effective by a factor of 20 percent.

But the study fails to compare the impact of sobriety checkpoints to other methods such as roving patrols, which are simply mobile patrols of police officers paying attention to drivers. ABI claims that roving patrols are much cheaper, more effective and not as easily avoided by drunk drivers as are checkpoints.

After all, that's what back roads are for.

The trade association may have a point that checkpoints are not the best way to go, but more independent research comparing the two methods might shed more light on the issue.

But let's face it: From ABI's perspective, a checkpoint along a major intersection standing between a residential area and a dining/entertainment district may have a negative effect on business. That doesn't necessarily mean ABI thinks cracking down on drunk driving is bad for business, per se, but rather the fear of a checkpoint is.

The bottom line is that until we have some better independent, third-party research, it's hard to say whether or not sobriety checkpoints are a good use of Illinois taxypayers' money.