"There's no way in hell I would pull up" : Deterrent and other effects of vehicle impoundment laws for hooning

Traffic law enforcement is based on deterrence principles, whereby drivers control their behaviour in order to avoid an undesirable sanction. For “hooning”-related driving behaviours in Queensland, the driver’s vehicle can be impounded for 48 hours, 3 months, or permanently depending on the number of previous hooning offences. It is assumed that the threat of losing something of value, their vehicle, will discourage drivers from hooning. While official data shows that the rate of repeat offending is low, an in-depth understanding of the deterrent effects of these laws should involve qualitative research with targeted drivers. A sample of 22 drivers who reported engaging in hooning behaviours participated in focus group discussions about the vehicle impoundment laws as applied to hooning offences in Queensland. The findings suggested that deterrence theory alone cannot fully explain hooning behaviour, as participants reported hooning frequently, and intended to continue doing so, despite reporting that it is likely that they will be caught, and perceiving the vehicle impoundment laws to be extremely severe. The punishment avoidance aspect of deterrence theory appears important, as well as factors over and above legal issues, particularly social influences. A concerning finding was drivers’ willingness to flee from police in order to avoid losing their vehicle permanently for a third offence, despite acknowledging risks to their own safety and that of others. This paper discusses the study findings in terms of the implications for future research directions, enforcement practices and policy development for hooning and other traffic offences for which vehicle impoundment is applied.

Random Breath Testing Operation and Effectiveness in 1985

Random breath testing (RBT) was introduced in South Australia in 1981 with the intention of reducing the incidence of accidents involving alcohol. In April 1985, a Select Committee of the Upper House which had been established to “review the operation of random breath testing in this State and any other associated matters and report accordingly” presented its report. After consideration of this report, the Government introduced extensive amendments to those sections of the Motor Vehicles Act (MVA) and Road Traffic Act (RTA) which deal with RBT and drink driving penalties. The amended section 47da of the RTA requires that: “(5) The Minister shall cause a report to be prepared within three months after the end of each calendar year on the operation and effectiveness of this section and related sections during that calendar year. (6) The Minister shall, within 12 sitting days after receipt of a report under subsection (5), cause copies of the report to be laid before each House of Parliament.” This is the first such report. Whilst it deals with RBT over a full year, the changed procedures and improved flexibility allowed by the revision to the RTA were only introduced late in 1985 and then only to the extent that the existing resources would allow.