Traffic deaths jump after six-year decline

[cpzilliacus]

Not good news from the Washington Post: Traffic deaths jump after six-year decline

After six years of decline took traffic deaths to the lowest point in 60 years, they increased dramatically in the first half of 2012, federal data show.

Highway safety experts were at a loss to explain why, but most speculated that rebounding economic confidence may have put more people on the roads.

[nwi_navigator_1181]

If I could offer an opinion...

One of the reasons that I observe every day is that the driving laws are a bit too lenient. I see drivers failing to use a turn signal for lane changes or turns, and I see people failing to yield to the right of way, opting to blow the red light to get the jump in traffic. Never mind that - as my sig implies - hardly anyone knows the fundamentals of proper lane usage.

On top of that, the federal and state governments should take up on the NTSB's suggestion and outright ban the use of cell phones while in the act of driving. If we're reminded that driving is a privilege and not a God-given right and administer stricter penalties for violations, maybe that will wake us up.

[Scott5114]

I would imagine that some of the reason for non-compliance with traffic rules is the same as non-compliance with speed limits: either people don't understand why compliance is necessary, or they outright feel that there is no reason to comply with the law other than the law's sake.

For example, most intersections are designed with clear enough sight lines that one knows whether there is oncoming traffic before reaching the stop line. It is hard to argue the need to come to a complete stop before making a right turn on red at such an intersection. Last week, I was pulled over for not coming to a complete stop at a stop sign...at 12:55 AM on a Thursday. While I suspect that the officer was more interested in the fact that I was pulling out of a certain street in the wee hours of the morning (I don't live in a particularly good neighborhood) and simply used the California stop as a justification to look for anything more illegal I might be doing (he seemed to ask an awful lot of questions like "do you live on that street", "how long have you lived there", "why are you leaving at this time of night", etc), it is hard to argue that I actually endangered anyone by rolling a stop sign in suburbia at 12:55 AM.

[amroad17]

A big reason may be the advent of the cell phone.  Over the past few years I have noticed many, many people talking on them while driving and many, many people texting while driving.  Most people have a hard time doing two things at once, but texting and driving are a lethal mix for disaster.

Driving requires your full concentration because, although you may be an excellent driver, the person next to you may not be paying attention to what is going on around them.  They may be too engrossed in conversation they think is more important at that time.

[Scott5114]

We didn't have six years of no cell phones and suddenly get them again.

[Brandon]

I would imagine that some of the reason for non-compliance with traffic rules is the same as non-compliance with speed limits: either people don't understand why compliance is necessary, or they outright feel that there is no reason to comply with the law other than the law's sake.

Regarding non-compliance, I believe that part of the reason is wrongly used speed limits and an overuse of stop signs.

People were taught, with the NMSL (55 mph limit) that speed limits were little more than a whim of Congress or a state legislature rather than being based on the design of the road.  It's still evident along I-294 (as an example) around Chicago today.  The limit is 55 mph on a road designed for 70-75 mph.  And what do people drive I-294 at?  70-75 mph is very common in spite of the 55 mph limit.

Also, I believe that the NMSL helped lead to a breakdown in lane discipline by teaching drivers that all lanes are to go at the speed limit instead of having a fast and slow lane.  For that one, I also fault enforcement.  Enforcement focuses too much on speed and too little on other driving behaviors that actually add to the danger on the road.  A person tailgating and weaving is far more of a danger than one going 75 in a 55 on a freeway.  Yet, cops take the easy way out and sit on the side of the road (lazy, IMHO) with a radar gun.

Another factor, regarding stop signs, is the incessant overuse of stop signs.  We use stop signs for everything such as RIROs where a yield would be better.  We use stop signs at pedestrian crossings in the middle of the block.  Wouldn't a yield sign, again, be better?  We use four way stops at every flipping intersection (yes, Chicago, that's you) and wonder why drivers seem impatient between them.  Studies have shown that alternating the stops leads to less driver impatience.

Then there's the issue of signal timing.  When drivers know that they can make a signal, they don't fly between them (i.e. Telegraph Road in Detroit).  However, when it's a guessing game (as along IL-59), drivers will speed to make the signal and not be able to stop quickly when it changes to red.

We've been bombarded with decades of poor legislative decisions, poor engineering, and poor enforcement, and then wonder why driving behavior is so bad.

[Ace10]

People were taught, with the NMSL (55 mph limit) that speed limits were little more than a whim of Congress or a state legislature rather than being based on the design of the road.  It's still evident along I-294 (as an example) around Chicago today.  The limit is 55 mph on a road designed for 70-75 mph.  And what do people drive I-294 at?  70-75 mph is very common in spite of the 55 mph limit.

Also, I believe that the NMSL helped lead to a breakdown in lane discipline by teaching drivers that all lanes are to go at the speed limit instead of having a fast and slow lane.  For that one, I also fault enforcement.  Enforcement focuses too much on speed and too little on other driving behaviors that actually add to the danger on the road.  A person tailgating and weaving is far more of a danger than one going 75 in a 55 on a freeway.  Yet, cops take the easy way out and sit on the side of the road (lazy, IMHO) with a radar gun.

I am in complete agreement with you regarding the speed limits. As someone who has gotten 4 tickets and 1 warning, but NO at-fault accidents ever, and no accidents whatsoever in the past 8 years, there is something totally wrong with the way they are being enforced.

I totally understand the need to drive at a lower limit for different conditions, such as poor weather or visibility or congestion. But on a clear day with very light traffic, it can be completely safe to drive 5, 10, or even 15 mph over the posted limit. Yet, when traffic is nicely moving at a faster speed and everyone sees a cop on the shoulder or in the median, everyone brakes and messes up the entire pattern. I swear, speed traps do much more harm than they help, and could potentially cause accidents from people reacting when the flow of traffic was fine to begin with.

I recently took a trip all the way across the US, and I absolutely loved driving in the West with its 75-80 mph limits on freeways. The traffic counts are what I would normally encounter where I've lived before (Mississippi and Florida), and the roads were generally of the same design, had as many curves, hills, and such. And yet, both MS and FL insist on a 70 maximum. This is one thing I applaud Louisiana for when they posted 75 on I-49.

And I can't tell you how many awful drivers I encounter as far as slow drivers in the left lane or tailgaters, or even people failing to stop at a 4-way stop and proceed when it's clearly someone else's turn to go. Yet where is the enforcement for these drivers? Why don't I see as many of these drivers being pulled over, yet I always see a cop on the side of the road just sitting there? It's an absolute abomination. We should all come together and get these speed traps outlawed!

[cpzilliacus]

I would imagine that some of the reason for non-compliance with traffic rules is the same as non-compliance with speed limits: either people don't understand why compliance is necessary, or they outright feel that there is no reason to comply with the law other than the law's sake.

Regarding non-compliance, I believe that part of the reason is wrongly used speed limits and an overuse of stop signs.

Certainly there are many municipalities and counties that improperly use the STOP sign as a "traffic calming" device, even though the 2009 MUTCD explicitly says (here) that it should not be used for same.  Quoting from the MUTCD:

YIELD or STOP signs should not be used for speed control.

People were taught, with the NMSL (55 mph limit) that speed limits were little more than a whim of Congress or a state legislature rather than being based on the design of the road.  It's still evident along I-294 (as an example) around Chicago today.  The limit is 55 mph on a road designed for 70-75 mph.  And what do people drive I-294 at?  70-75 mph is very common in spite of the 55 mph limit.

The Capital Beltway is all 55 MPH, and yes, that speed limit is mostly ignored (I think the 85th percentile speed is probably about 65 or 70 MPH) and usually not enforced by either state police agency.  Even on Md. Route 200 (ICC), where the 55 MPH limit is strictly enforced, I suspect that the 85th percentile speed is close to 65 MPH.

Environmental and social engineering groups are among the biggest boosters of the 55 MPH speed limit, even on freeways that were designed for much higher speeds - the two favored arguments that I have heard are that a higher limit will "hurt transit patronage," or "worsen air quality."  One argument they do not usually use is traffic safety (perhaps because they don't care about safety, at least not on expressway- and freeway-class roads).

Also, I believe that the NMSL helped lead to a breakdown in lane discipline by teaching drivers that all lanes are to go at the speed limit instead of having a fast and slow lane.  For that one, I also fault enforcement.  Enforcement focuses too much on speed and too little on other driving behaviors that actually add to the danger on the road.  A person tailgating and weaving is far more of a danger than one going 75 in a 55 on a freeway.  Yet, cops take the easy way out and sit on the side of the road (lazy, IMHO) with a radar gun.

It's not always illegal to block the left lane, as the late John Nestor, M.D. used to do on the Beltway at 55 MPH.

Another factor, regarding stop signs, is the incessant overuse of stop signs.  We use stop signs for everything such as RIROs where a yield would be better.  We use stop signs at pedestrian crossings in the middle of the block.  Wouldn't a yield sign, again, be better?  We use four way stops at every flipping intersection (yes, Chicago, that's you) and wonder why drivers seem impatient between them.  Studies have shown that alternating the stops leads to less driver impatience.

Same problem in the District of Columbia.

One of the joys of driving in the Nordic countries is the (relative) lack of STOP signs.  Many intersections are uncontrolled (yield to traffic on the right), or controlled with a YIELD sign instead.

Then there's the issue of signal timing.  When drivers know that they can make a signal, they don't fly between them (i.e. Telegraph Road in Detroit).  However, when it's a guessing game (as along IL-59), drivers will speed to make the signal and not be able to stop quickly when it changes to red.

"Bad" signal timing encourages speeding and red light running. 

We've been bombarded with decades of poor legislative decisions, poor engineering, and poor enforcement, and then wonder why driving behavior is so bad.

There's also the problem of unlicensed and uninsured drivers.  Since those people are already breaking the law, I think a lot of them feel that traffic rules do not apply to them.

And finally, there's the matter of "sport bikes," a/k/a "crotch rocket" motorcycles (Suzuki GSXR 600, Kawasaki Ninja ZX-14, and the Suzuki GSX 1300R Hayabusa, among others).  In Maryland, we have had several fatal crotch rocket wrecks in the past few days.  I don't really mind it if the Darwin rule applies to riders of such motorcycles, but the taxpayer expense of police investigations and autopsies is significant, in addition to road closures usually required after a fatal crash.

[agentsteel53]

social engineering groups

what is a social engineering group?

the only time I've heard the term "social engineering" is when someone unscrupulous calls you up, tells you they're from the IT department, and asks you for your Facebook password.

[agentsteel53]

And I can't tell you how many awful drivers I encounter as far as slow drivers in the left lane or tailgaters, or even people failing to stop at a 4-way stop and proceed when it's clearly someone else's turn to go. Yet where is the enforcement for these drivers? Why don't I see as many of these drivers being pulled over, yet I always see a cop on the side of the road just sitting there? It's an absolute abomination. We should all come together and get these speed traps outlawed!

they certainly have no motive$ beyond the public $afety.  no $ir.

[cpzilliacus]

social engineering groups

what is a social engineering group?

Usually groups that wish to impose Smart Growth (and frequently "carfree") schemes on large populations using government authority (even though those populations don't want to live in a high-rise apartment building on top of a rail transit station).

Examples:

TransForm (California)

1,000 Friends of Oregon

1,000 Friends of Maryland

Tri-State Transportation Campaign (N.Y., N.J., Conn.)

Coaliton for Smarter Growth (Va., D.C., Md.)

the only time I've heard the term "social engineering" is when someone unscrupulous calls you up, tells you they're from the IT department, and asks you for your Facebook password.

I think one could make the case that the Communist dictatorships of the former Soviet Empire engaged in attempts at large-scale social engineering.

[NE2]

"Social engineering" = pushing lifestyles that I disagree with.

[Sammer]

We didn't have six years of no cell phones and suddenly get them again.

No but there certainly seems to be more driving while texting and more serious accidents caused by it than there were six years ago. I can't remember any news reports six years ago of fatal accidents that were likely caused by young drivers texting but unfortunately there have been such news reports more recently.

[agentsteel53]

this is not a scientific observation at all, but my impression is that the quantity of utter fucking morons on the road is going up.

[theline]

We didn't have six years of no cell phones and suddenly get them again.

No but there certainly seems to be more driving while texting and more serious accidents caused by it than there were six years ago. I can't remember any news reports six years ago of fatal accidents that were likely caused by young drivers texting but unfortunately there have been such news reports more recently.

Cell phone talking and texting is the most likely cause. I now make it a habit of checking out the driver, when possible, when I see a dumb-ass maneuver in traffic. A very high percentage are preoccupied by the cell phone.

The cell phone wasn't just invented, but its use has grown dramatically.

[kphoger]

this is not a scientific observation at all, but my impression is that the quantity of utter fucking morons on the road is going up.

Can we add the initialism UFM to the official AARoads lexicon?

[cpzilliacus]

We didn't have six years of no cell phones and suddenly get them again.

No but there certainly seems to be more driving while texting and more serious accidents caused by it than there were six years ago. I can't remember any news reports six years ago of fatal accidents that were likely caused by young drivers texting but unfortunately there have been such news reports more recently.

Cell phone talking and texting is the most likely cause. I now make it a habit of checking out the driver, when possible, when I see a dumb-ass maneuver in traffic. A very high percentage are preoccupied by the cell phone.

Based on my personal observations, I have seen much more dangerous driving by cell phone users at slow speeds (such as in parking lots and other low-speed areas) than at higher speeds. 

[cpzilliacus]

The cell phone wasn't just invented, but its use has grown dramatically.

But at least in the United States, other communications technology (in particular CB radio) goes back decades and was once rather common in private automobiles, not just commercial vehicles (yet I have not heard any calls for forbidding the use of such equipment).

[kphoger]

We didn't have six years of no cell phones and suddenly get them again.

No but there certainly seems to be more driving while texting and more serious accidents caused by it than there were six years ago. I can't remember any news reports six years ago of fatal accidents that were likely caused by young drivers texting but unfortunately there have been such news reports more recently.

Cell phone talking and texting is the most likely cause. I now make it a habit of checking out the driver, when possible, when I see a dumb-ass maneuver in traffic. A very high percentage are preoccupied by the cell phone.

Based on my personal observations, I have seen much more dangerous driving by cell phone users at slow speeds (such as in parking lots and other low-speed areas) than at higher speeds. 

This.  "Wow, where did THAT red light come from?"

[SidS1045]

It's not always illegal to block the left lane, as the late John Nestor, M.D. used to do on the Beltway at 55 MPH.

It may not be specifically illegal (although every state has a law which prohibits deliberately blocking traffic), but it is inherently dangerous...one reason "rechtsfahren" is the law on the German Autobahn.  Permitting passing on the right in most US jurisdictions was nothing more than giving in to untrained and clueless drivers who were doing it anyhow.  It certainly wasn't done for safety reasons.

IMO, it is the continuing and palpable abuses of power by police agencies, aided and abetted by the courts and insurance companies dangling money in front of cash-strapped governments, that lead to widespread disregard for traffic laws.  The system is corrupt and feeds on itself.  Once government agencies realized they could actually make money off of drivers, all too many of whom were engaged in safe and reasonable behavior but who went a few MPH faster than a sign posted on the side of the road told them to go, there was no going back.

[Alps]

Ultimately, life doesn't follow smooth curves. One would expect a noisy year, but the overall trend is what should be heeded.

[Duke87]

We didn't have six years of no cell phones and suddenly get them again.

No but there certainly seems to be more driving while texting and more serious accidents caused by it than there were six years ago. I can't remember any news reports six years ago of fatal accidents that were likely caused by young drivers texting but unfortunately there have been such news reports more recently.

Cell phone talking and texting is the most likely cause. I now make it a habit of checking out the driver, when possible, when I see a dumb-ass maneuver in traffic. A very high percentage are preoccupied by the cell phone.

The cell phone wasn't just invented, but its use has grown dramatically.

Smartphones have only made this worse. I have a friend who reads her email while driving. Says she has to, because sometimes the person sending it expects a quick response and she can't not give them one just because she's driving. It's mostly while stopped at red lights, but I swear sometimes it's every frigging red light.

[amroad17]

There have always been distractions while driving for years.  Eating, changing radio stations (remember the dials?), or just plain conversation with other occupants.  Just based on personal observations, I see many drivers using their cell phones, ipads, or smart phones more now than five or six years ago.  Even in restaurants people just cannot sit and enjoy a meal without someone at the table pulling out their phone for something.

Kids nowadays have probably had these phones since they were 10 and constantly seem to be using them.  So why would a little thing like driving keep them from using it then?  I don't have statistics, but could part of the rise include an increase in deaths for drivers aged 16-20?

[Alps]

Smartphones have only made this worse. I have a friend who reads her email while driving. Says she has to, because sometimes the person sending it expects a quick response and she can't not give them one just because she's driving. It's mostly while stopped at red lights, but I swear sometimes it's every frigging red light.

What the hell did people do before smart phones?

[Scott5114]

If you expect me to reply to you while I'm driving, you don't deserve a reply.