| This dissertation investigates why people persist in drinking and driving. Possible explanations were derived from specific deterrence, low self-control and strain/stress theories and hypotheses were tested in an integrated, exploratory model using official records (n = 692) and interview data (n = 145) covering the period between 1989-1993. Recidivism was assessed using new convictions and self-report data. Relationships between repeat drunk driving and punishment, traits of low self-control, stress and coping resources were explored in both bivariate and multivariate analyses.;My investigation provides some support for the notion that longer sentences will deter drunk driving recidivism. More lenient sentences such as intermittent weekend and fine default did not encourage recidivism. Perceived stress had a moderate effect on the likelihood of repeat drunk driving. Registered Indians were moderately more likely to drink and drive, while Metis did not exhibit greater or lesser recidivism than the general population. Overall, results did not support the general theory of crime. Generally, recidivism rates were lower than this theory predicted. Contrary to predictions of the general theory, "low self-control" offenders were deterred, and stress did not have a differential impact on them. Coping resources such as education, employment and social support did not appear to reduce recidivism. The strongest and most consistent recidivism predictors involved alcohol consumption. As a crime, drunk driving is not as well-explained by traditional criminological theories as predatory offences are.;From a policy perspective, the results of this dissertation suggest that drunk driving would be discouraged in some cases by longer sentences. However, intermittent sentences appear to be used appropriately by the courts for lower risk cases. Treatment programs focussing on stress management, reduced alcohol consumption and specific drinking avoidance strategies are recommended to reduce recidivism. |
