Drunk Driving and Teenagers

Teenagers and Drunk Driving

Historically, a major threat to teenagers in the United States is drunk driving injuries and fatalities. There has been great improvement on this issue. Since 1991, drunk-driving incidents involving high schoolers has dropped by 54%. 

However, many high schoolers continue to drive drunk. Alcohol is attributed to have caused or been a factor in 40% of all teen deaths in vehicular accidents. Teen drunk driving, by some estimates, every fifteen minutes a teenager will die from a drunk driving incident. 

Lastly, 60% of all teen car crashes are alcohol-related and 1 in every 10 American teenagers will drive under the influence of alcohol.

Alcohol is a big part of teen communities and therefore some statistics should be absorbed to understand the gravity and prevalence of alcohol-use in teenage communities. In 2003, the average boy tries his first tries of alcohol at 11 and the average girl at 13. On an average day, 11,318 teens will try alcohol for the first time. 

Alcohol abuse is more likely for those who begin drinking regularly before 15 years old. Lastly, three million American teens are alcoholics. These statistics show that alcohol is a big part of growing-up and holds a hallowed place in teenage communities. This must be tempered with policies that help to combat the potential threat teenage drunk driving can pose to the teenage community as well as the community at-large.

Zero Tolerance Laws

The tremendous drop in teenage drunk driving shows that effective strategies do exist o combat this specific threat. One of the most effective are known as “zero tolerance” laws. Zero tolerance laws are designed to deter drunk driving by making it illegal for all under the age of 21 to imbibe any alcohol at all and drive. 

This means in a jurisdiction where zero tolerance laws have been enacted, if someone under the age of 21 has any modicum of alcohol in their system, they will be considered to be driving drunk. The research has shown that laws like these have been effective in reducing drinking and driving crashes involving teenagers. 

The classification of these types of offences can vary depending on the jurisdiction in which the violation occurs. Some jurisdictions classify them as administrative infractions while others consider these offences are misdemeanor crimes. The facts of the case also play a role in what penalties are doled out.

The penalties, in cases such as these, can vary depending on how the state classifies the violation and the individual facts and circumstances of the incident. In many cases underage drivers with alcohol in their system can face: fines fluctuating from a few hundred to a few thousand dollars, up to a year in jail, community service, substance abuse classes or treatment, and/or having to install an ignition interlock device. Although most often underage DUI penalties are less severe than normal DUI penalties, they can still have major repercussions in a young person’s life.

Less Known Adverse Effects of an Underage DUI Conviction

All young people should be aware of the extent to which a DUI can affect their life. Yes, underage DUIs can cause fines and even jail time. However, there can be other adversities posed by such a conviction. 

Applications to colleges and universities can be compromised by an underage drunk driving conviction. Most undergraduate institutions have a section in their application process devoted to crimes and infractions. On a college application, a misdemeanor can be lumped in with more serious crimes. 

Therefore, whether the underage DUI is a misdemeanor in that teenager’s students state can be a big deal for any potential students. It is true that underage DUIs do not necessarily disqualify you from getting your undergraduate degree, but it can be a factor that is given significant consideration and can materially hurt a teenager’s chance at an acceptance.

An underage DUI can potentially affect your ability to get certain types of employment. However, it is not common that an underage DUI (assuming it wasn’t followed with a pattern of irresponsible behavior and that offence occurred a number of years ago) will not substantially affect your search for employment. 

Again, this can depend on whether your state considers violation of zero tolerance laws a misdemeanor or merely an administrative infraction. Background checks are common for many employment applications and thus it is essential to be aware of your state’s policy on if they have a zero tolerance law on the books and if so how stringent it’s penalties are.

What Can Be Done to Avoid all of This?

First and foremost, teens must take the responsibility unto themselves to comport with behavior that minimizes the risk of being in alcohol-related vehicular accidents. Perhaps the most important thing teens can do is to not drink and drive. Teens should also not ride in a vehicle with another teen who has been drinking. In fact, they should make reasonable attempts to dissuade other teens from driving inebriated. Furthermore, obey the speed limit, don’t text and drive, and put on your seatbelt. All of these steps will make teens safer on the roads and hopefully will not only diminish drunk driving rates as well as promote safe driving in general.

Second, parents must be the vanguards of safety for their children and make reasonable efforts to ensure responsible behavior. Parents must understand that teenagers will drink and when they do they may be doing so to get drunk. Parents should also understand that drunk driving is more dangerous for teenagers than adults, in large part, because teenagers aren’t used to drinking and knowing their alcohol limits. Studies show that an effective way to respond is not to enforce draconian rules for your kids, but rater give them options. Offer to give them a way to get home safe and sound. This may be done by picking them up or sending a cab to get them. It is essential that teenagers do not feel desperate to hide their drinking as this is what often underpins desperate behavior. Lastly, be a good role model for your teenager by always adhering to the rules of the road.

Uber and Drunk Driving

Does Uber help drunk driving statistics?

The rise of Uber and other alternatives to traditional taxicab services have led to claims that such services have been responsible for a drop in the national drunk driving incident rate. This claim has been promulgated by Uber itself who claim, “Services like Uber—where passengers push a button and get a ride in minutes—are helping to curb drunk driving.”

However, the American Journal of Epidemiology (“AJE”) believes the real story is a little more complicated. The AJE conducted a survey that was notable for examining the effect Uber has on different cities as opposed to the more conventional academic approach of compiling and analyzing statistics nationally. 

So, did the AJE find that Uber and other rideshare services have helped deter drunk-driving incidents. The answer is complicated.

Uber Does Help, Sometimes

The tempting assertion to hail Uber as a hero in the struggle against drunk driving is tantalizing. Uber, seemingly, would give potential inebriated drivers access to convenient, low-cost transportation. 

Why would someone drink and drive when given the readily-available alternative presented by ridesharing companies? Well, these assumptions are based on a few false premises. To begin, the argument that Uber presents a low-cost alternative to driving drunk is unsubstantiated. 

As the AJE puts it, “because drivers are unlikely to get caught drinking and driving, paying for a rideshare service may still be far more costly than driving drunk for many individuals.”

Drunk-drivers are motivated to drive home inebriated because they believe they will not be caught. This means just because uber is inexpensive does not mean that it will deter people from drunk-driving. 

When an inebriated person makes the decision to drive drunk, they might be doing so to avoid Uber costs all-together. In other words, Ubers might be relatively cheap, but more often than not they are not cheaper than just taking your car home.

The Assumption of Rationality

Another fallacy the presumption Uber helps lower drunk driving incident rates rests upon the assumption of rationality. The AJE writes, “the average inebriated individual contemplating drunk driving may not be sufficiently rational to substitute drinking and driving for a presumably safer Uber ride.” 

It is fair to assume that most drunk-drivers make the decision to drive under the influence of alcohol when already inebriated. While under the influence of alcohol, decision-making prowess and rational thought can be compromised. 

Therefore, it cannot be assumed that most drunk-drivers are operating under the same level of rationality as they would while sober. This loss of rationality makes it unreasonable to assume people will make the smart decision and call an Uber.

Ubers are Substitutes for Taxis, but Not for Drunk-Driving

Another presumption made by those who believe Uber to be lowering drunk-driving rates is that Uber will be used as an alternative to drunk driving. It was mentioned above that Uber’s convenience is what may make it a plausible alternative to driving home under the influence. This presumption is unsubstantiated.


Uber is not a substitute for drunk-driving and is merely a substitute for public transportation, walking, or taxis. A potential drunk driver often does not see Uber as a viable option for a few reasons. One of the biggest reasons, is the inconvenience of leaving their car where it is rather than taking it home. 

It is inconvenient for a drunk person, who used their car to get to the area in which they now seek to leave, to leave it there overnight because they feel they are under the influence. Therefore, more often than not, Uber does not eliminate the inconvenience of leaving your car somewhere far from where you want it.

How the AJE Conducted Its Experiment

Now that some presumptions have been challenged, it is time to delve into the experiment itself and its results. The AJE conducted this experiment in Las Vegas, Portland, Reno, and San Antonio. These cities were picked because they are urban environments and Uber had launched, ended, and then resumed operations there at some point. 

The study wanted to test the claim made by Uber asserting drunk-driving had been curbed by their company. It is clear immediately one of the biggest limitations this test suffers from. They do not represent and do not purport to represent anything other than urban environments. 

The researchers sought to analyze the data from the first five years of Uber’s presence in the city and come up with evidence that either supports or disagrees with the claims made by Uber.

What are the Results?

As mentioned above, the results are complicated. It seems for now Uber is partially correct in their assertion, but not entirely. Uber has helped curb drunk driving in some places, but not others. Thus, it is an oversimplification to claim that Uber curbs obesity. 

To start, crashes involving alcohol lessened as Uber resumed its presence in Portland and San Antonio. Reno does not show any less car crashes as a result of drunk-driving. Las Vegas showed more positive numbers as a result of Uber’s presence than Reno, but the prevalence of Uber use in 

Las Vegas is much higher due to the constant influx of tourists. In sum, Uber does help curb drunk driving in the right circumstances.

What Circumstances Does Uber Lower Drunk-Driving 

In urban environments, there can be many factors that allow Uber success in deterring drunk driving. As mentioned above, high influxes of tourists normally indicate greater usage of ridesharing services like Uber. Cities that have less tourism seem to have not been affected by Uber’s presence as the majority of people simply use their vehicles to get around resulting in more instances of drunk driving. 

Other unique variables exist such as topography and availability of public transportation. Traffic and population density are big indications of whether Uber will have success in curbing drunk-driving, as people are more inclined to travel by Uber in high-density areas. 

Thus, Uber’s claim that they help lower drunk-driving rates is not exactly correct and not exactly wrong. Certainly, other factors exist outside of Uber’s control and thus those looking to deter drunk-driving should look to what other successful cities have that they do not have.

DUI Lawyer Baltimore Md - Maryland Drunk Driving & DWI Defense Attorney - Penalty for DUI

What is the Penalty for a DUI in Maryland?

If you are facing a DUI, DWI or drunk driving charge in Maryland, call the Baltimore MD DUI Lawyer G. Randolph Rice, Jr., at 410-288-2900 or email him directly for immediate help.

Maryland DUI Lawyer
G. Randolph Rice, Jr.
410-288-2900

Prior to entering private practice as a DUI & DWI defense attorney, Randolph Rice was a former Assistant State's Attorney.  He has handled thousands of DUI and DWI cases in Maryland.  He represents clients charged with DUI and DWI in the following counties and cities in Maryland:

• Baltimore County;
• Baltimore City;
• Harford County;
• Howard County;
• Anne Arundel County; and
• Ocean City, Maryland.

Penalties for a DUI Conviction in Maryland

Prior DUI and Receiving a PBJ

If you had a DUI or DWI conviction in the past 10 years, you are not eligible for another probation before judgment.

Maryland Criminal Procedure Code Ann. § 6-220 (2014)
§ 6-220. Probation before judgment

(d) Conditions under which probation before judgment prohibited.

Notwithstanding subsections (b) and (c) of this section, a court may not stay the entering of judgment and place a defendant on probation for:
(1) a violation of § 21-902 of the Transportation Article or § 2-503, § 2-504, § 2-505, § 2-506, or § 3-211 of the Criminal Law Article, if within the preceding 10 years the defendant has been convicted under § 21-902 of the Transportation Article or § 2-503, § 2-504, § 2-505, § 2-506, or § 3-211 of the Criminal Law Article, or has been placed on probation in accordance with this section, after being charged with a violation of § 21-902 of the Transportation Article or § 2-503, § 2-504, § 2-505, § 2-506, or § 3-211 of the Criminal Law Article;

Maximum Sentence for First Maryland DUI or DWI

First DUI (21-902(a))

• Maximum Jail – Up to 1 Year
• Maximum Jail – Up to 2 Years (If Transporting Minor)
• Maximum License Suspension – 6 Months Minimum
• Maximum Fine - Up to $1,000
• Maximum Fine - Up to $2,000 (If Transporting Minor)

First DWI (21-902(b))

• Maximum Jail – Up to 2 Months
• Maximum Jail – Up to 6 Months (If Transporting Minor)
• Maximum License Suspension – 6 Months Minimum
• Maximum Fine - Up to $500
• Maximum Fine - Up to $1,000 (If Transporting Minor)

Call 410-288-2900 to speak with Maryland DUI Lawyer Randolph Rice. Mr. Rice will explain every step of a DUI/DWI in Maryland.  He will discuss the possible driver's license consequences and the potential for jail and how to fight your case in Court.

Make sure you a hire an experienced DUI Lawyer, call Randolph Rice, at 410-288-2900 for immediate legal help.

Do you need to find your case, click here for the Maryland Judiciary Case Search.  Enter your last name, first name and middle initial to find any active or closed cases in Maryland.