Friday, June 13, 2008

Why Government Doesn't Regulate Highway Speed Effectively

You've all seen it happen. You're driving the freeway and cars are passing you at twenty, thirty and forty miles over the speed limit. Cutting in and out with what seems total impunity to traffic enforcement. Driving that borders on criminal, if not felonious, yet it continues every day as drivers push the envelope to get where they want to go, with total disregard of those around them, and the consequences of an accident at those velocities.

Yet, when a horrific accident occurs, and a number of lives are lost, law enforcement stands in front of the media cameras and professes their stringent attempts to curtail speeding and reckless driving on the highways. To those who see it every day, that's just a bunch of political bull sh*t to try and salve the wounds of families who lose loved ones out on our roads day after day.

Facts are that the states do not hire sufficient traffic officers to patrol the highways effectively, preferring to use Selective Traffic Enforcement (STEP) patrols which operate like wolf packs, when a certain area of the highways have a problem. They use a team to saturate a problem area, which may be the result of a series of crashes, to slow down traffic and issue a larger number of citations than usual, for a few days, and then go away. That creates the illusion of effectiveness to a segment of the motoring public, who sees a flurry of activity and police units for a short period. And you call that pro-active policing? I call this the "too little-too late" doctrine.

Same for the all-out DWI enforcement around the holidays and the media blitz on how many persons were caught, versus previous years statistics. That has absolutely no correlation with the actual number of persons who were actually on the roads at any given time under the influence of alcohol or drugs; simply a snapshot of how many went through checkpoints or were drunk enough to attract an officer's attention or be called in and somehow stopped.

Street Racing Enforcement units are disbanded as soon as there is a drop in the number of street racing related crashes and deaths, and the numbers go right back up. The racers know who's watching them and who's not. So why not maintain the units? It's like the USDA not inspecting cows for mad cow disease, because you didn't find any this month, so why bother ever looking again! Same stupid lack of logic. Just wait until the disease rears its' ugly head and then we'll start checking the animals again. It's too late then, just as it's too late when even one street racing death could have been prevented, had the police unit not been disbanded.

In my humble opinion, highway patrols operate similar to the "shark theory" on our freeways. They lurk about, looking for the motorist in the pack who looks like the easiest prey to grab, or the one with the most egregious driving attitude, that they can apprehend. If there are one- hundred vehicles traveling at twenty five miles over the speed limit, the "shark" will only get one out of that pack of one-hundred, leaving ninety-nine to continue to blatantly ignore the law. The one who was caught is just the luck of the draw in most cases, and could have been picked because of multiple infractions such as tinted windows, tail light or license plate out. or other such issue in addition to speed. Or, simply because he or she was the one picked out of the pack and for no other reason than speed. Of course, the driver who is all alone driving way over the limit or weaving in and out of traffic presents a pretty nice opportunity to become "shark bait" with no other attractant necessary!

If California, for example, wanted to help reduce deaths on the roads, and in turn reduce their budget shortfalls, now would be the ideal time to enact a tougher speed law that would protect drivers and help save energy at the same time. First, start enforcing the existing speed laws more rigidly. Secondly, institute a tiered "Waste of Natural Resources" surcharge on top of the speeding fines for those drivers who can't seem to stay within sane speed limits. Drive 20 miles over the limit, pay the fine plus a $250 surcharge; drive 30 miles over and pay the fine plus a $500 surcharge; drive 40 miles over the limit and pay the fine plus a $1000 surcharge. Subsequent infractions would have the surcharges increased commensurate with the violation, along with loss of license and perhaps the vehicle.

In defense of the traffic officers we have, there are not enough. We need to hire more, and to allow them overtime to spend the time needed in high impact areas, where they can do the most good in traffic enforcement.

Of course, as long as the people continue to put up with drunk and drugged driving, and the carnage on our highways, and allow the lackadaisical speed enforcement you see out on the highways today, nothing will be done. When you have drivers that have three and four driving while intoxicated convictions on their record, and are then involved in a fatal crash, a loud siren should be blasting in not only the publics' but the government's ears that something is more than wrong. These people are criminals who needed to be off the streets long before now. Why does it take someones' death to sound the alarm?

I've spent enough time at crashes to see the result; more than enough to last me many lifetimes. I've had to notify families that their loved ones wouldn't be coming home again, and if you don't think that's the worst job in the world, I don't know what you think it could be. All the air bags, seat belts and safety systems won't overcome velocity dynamics, when they far outweigh the normal design function that is designed into a car. And, no manufacturer tests for 100 mile per hour head-on collisions or side collisions at odd angles on the freeway. Metal is metal and flesh isn't. And when you mix the two in a crash, flesh doesn't do very well at all.

No comments: