Should funeral processions be banned?

[jemacedo9]

In my opinion.  I think that funeral processions should be limited to a reasonable number of cars (close family, friends, not to exceed some number), and all those permitted should have those flags mounted on their cars, and drive with their 4-ways on.  There should also be an official car at the end of the procession.  That procession should be able to proceed through red lights and on interstates. I do a lot of traveling, and at best I see 2 a year, so I'd say for most people, the inconvenience caused by one is a minor one.

For those close who are mourning, I think it would be particularly painful to miss the burial because they couldn't legally keep up with the procession.  At the same time, it would be just as painful to be sitting at the grave site, waiting 45 minutes for the rest of the procession to catch up because they were caught up at red lights.  A lot of the responses here seem to be forgetting the point of view of those in the funeral procession.

Again, I say, the official procession does need to be limited somehow.  And I don't think those driving on the same road, either in front of or in opposite direction to the procession, need to pull over.  Just don't cut through.

[dgolub]

I say it would probably be a good idea to ban them. Nobody, other than emergency vehicles, should have special privileges to break traffic laws or obstruct traffic.

This.  I'm all for showing sensitivity around something as difficult as a funeral, but the top priority needs to be to prevent the need to have additional funerals, and the reality is that having vehicles going through red lights without lights and siren like emergency vehicles is a safety hazard that places people's lives in danger.

[Pete from Boston]

For those close who are mourning, I think it would be particularly painful to miss the burial because they couldn't legally keep up with the procession.  At the same time, it would be just as painful to be sitting at the grave site, waiting 45 minutes for the rest of the procession to catch up because they were caught up at red lights.  A lot of the responses here seem to be forgetting the point of view of those in the funeral procession.

I'm curious how many folks here who have, say, lost a parent objected when their funeral ran a red light. 

The way it was taught to me is that this is a courtesy we all show one another, because we all end up in mourning periodically, and it's the right thing to do to make life a little easier for mourners, who likely have it worse than us at that moment.

I say it would probably be a good idea to ban them. Nobody, other than emergency vehicles, should have special privileges to break traffic laws or obstruct traffic.

This.  I'm all for showing sensitivity around something as difficult as a funeral, but the top priority needs to be to prevent the need to have additional funerals, and the reality is that having vehicles going through red lights without lights and siren like emergency vehicles is a safety hazard that places people's lives in danger.

I'd be interested in seeing accident rates for emergency vehicles passing through red lights versus those of funeral processions doing the same.

[SP Cook]

The nearest I ever came to a truly high speed accident was at the JCT of I-79 and I-68.  I was going from 68 to 79 SOUTH and was at an appropriate speed for an interstate.  Some genius deputy thought it appropriate to have a funeral procession going 30 MPH  in the slow lane on 79 and that he should drive similarly in the fast lane to prevent people from passing.   I stopped, barely, and the Freightliner behind me even more so.  Simply stupid.

As there are surface alternatives for 95% + of all interstates, there simply is no reason for a slow moving funeral to be on an interstate. 

As to surface streets, if the funeral is going to blow traffic lights, then somebody needs to be there, or they need to use the modern technology available to simply change the cycles.

[PHLBOS]

When I was studying to take my driver's license test (in Massachusetts circa 1982); the very last question in the manual (a small, pale blue book that contained over 80 questions) dealt with what one is directed to do when approaching a funeral procession.  In a nutshell, the answer stated that such was not to be interrupted for any reason.

I'm assuming that the rule hasn't changed since then.

Several years ago, I was in two funeral processions (one in PA, the other in NJ) only to encounter vehicles cutting into the procession; despite the procession vehicles having flags/signs, headlights & emergency flashers on.  That ticked me off a bit because such caused a gap/delay in the procession.  Prior to people's cell phones going off in theaters, church services, etc.; disrupting a funeral procession was one of my bigger personal pet peeves.

This is a very touchy subject, but personally I think they should only be held during low-traffic ours, usually from 10pm-5am, but hey I'm a unique person, that's just me.

Aka the Graveyard Shift.   

With regards to funeral processions using highways/expressways: one needs to understand that usage of such is dependent upon origin (funeral home/place of worship) and destination (cemetery) locations.  The only processions that I've been (be it driver or passenger) on that involved using highways were because of either:

1.  There was no non-highway alternative road/route within reasonable proximity.

and/or

2.  Distance between origin & destination.  My great-aunt's funeral of 38 years ago this month was an example of such.  She resided in Kemnore Square in Boston for decades but desired to be buried in Lowell where she grew up.  Using I-93 to I-495 (IIRC, we exited off at MA 133) was the only time-practical option despite traveling at lower speeds.  One could only imagine how long such would've taken if one only used MA 28 and 38 as a means to get to Lowell from Boston.

In short, it boils down to time and money.  Funeral procession-related travel time can be a sizable chunk of the overall cost of a funeral.

One (rhetorical) question towards those against funeral processions: have you actually been in a funeral procession (either as a passenger or driver)?

[roadman]

Processions should be banned from all interstates. Period.

Question - How frequently do funeral processions actually need to use Interstates or freeways instead of surface streets to get from the church to the cemetery?  In the case of both of my parents (died in 1987 and 1989), who had their wakes and funeral masses in Lynn MA, but were buried in the family plot in Bedford NH, using the interstate was the logical choice for both time and other considerations (for one thing, less disruption to other traffic than if the procession used MA/NH 28 instead of I-93).  However, I suspect our circumstance was the exception rather than the rule.

[Mrt90]

http://www.claimsjournal.com/news/national/2014/07/03/251323.htm

I found the above article from July 2014 which summarizes the funeral procession laws in every state.  Surprisingly, there are a number of states which have no rules at all.


The last funeral that I went to (in Wisconsin) we were told to put on our bright lights and our hazard lights, although the law apparently just requires the regular headlights.  There were a couple of extra escort cars with flashing orange lights on top that started out behind the hearse and then dropped off to block traffic at a couple of major intersections.  I'm guessing this funeral home already knew which intersections were potential problems.

[Brandon]

Get rid of them.  I'm more in favor of cremation myself.  There is no logical need to place a body in a casket in the ground with a headstone in this modern world.  I'm with Rodney Dangerfield's character in Caddyshack on this.

[oscar]

Question - How frequently do funeral processions actually need to use Interstates or freeways instead of surface streets to get from the church to the cemetery?  In the case of both of my parents (died in 1987 and 1989), who had their wakes and funeral masses in Lynn MA, but were buried in the family plot in Bedford NH, using the interstate was the logical choice for both time and other considerations (for one thing, less disruption to other traffic than if the procession used MA/NH 28 instead of I-93).  However, I suspect our circumstance was the exception rather than the rule.

How much trouble did you have keeping the procession together for such a long trek? I'd expect problems with other traffic at the many exits along the way, or vehicles needing to peel away mid-procession for bathroom breaks or refueling.

It would be safer, and I suspect logistically easier, to provide really clear directions to the cemetery, and either have no procession or at least break up the procession before entering the freeway and reassemble it at the other end. Working out such arrangements seems to me part of what funeral directors are paid for.

[hbelkins]

IIRC, the flame wars on MTR came about because some objected to the practice of oncoming traffic stopping to pay respects to the deceased/show sympathy for the survivors. That is a tradition in this part of Kentucky and I will most certainly stop and wait for the procession to pass if I meet one.

As for having unbroken processions, part of the reasoning may be to allow people unfamiliar with the area to be able to find the cemetery. The most recent funeral I attended was a few years ago for my great-aunt, whose son also worked in my office at the time. A number of our co-workers from other counties attended. They probably didn't know where the cemetery was -- heck, I didn't even know where it was or that my great uncle, who had died in an electrocution accident when I was very young, was buried there, because it was in my great-uncle's home county and not my great-aunt's.

Those of you who have attended road meets, especially in the days before printed directions were common, where some in the caravan got lost can probably understand the reasoning behind an unbroken procession so everyone can make it to the cemetery for the graveside services that usually conclude a funeral.

And has our society gotten so MFFY that we can't even take a few short moments to show some civility and human kindness?

[UCFKnights]

I ask this because today I saw an accident with a funeral procession. A black car waiting to make a left turn had crept into the intersection waiting for a gap. The light then turned red, whereupon the black car began to make the turn even though a blue car was approaching the intersection from the oncoming direction. The blue car wasn't stopping because it was part of a funeral procession, and as a result, the black car hit the blue car. Luckily, the damage seemed minimal, although the blue car did skid a bit.

And this is why you don't pull into the intersection to turn left if the way isn't clear. Not only will it potentially get you a gridlock ticket around here (don't enter the intersection if the way out isn't clear), it causes so many accidents when people heading straight race the yellow or early red.

I mean, without violating any laws or creating any such danger, you could wait in the intersection for the procession to be completed and past you, and then proceed to make your left. Just like always.

[DaBigE]

For those of you who say ban them or reserve willful disobedience of traffic laws to emergency vehicles, what about processions of nothing but emergency vehicles? Ban them too? This one seems far longer than the processions I've seen or been a part of.

The last couple processions I've seen had a squad car providing some traffic control. The last one I was a part of had a funeral home car with mini lightbars leading and bringing up the tail end.

I cannot remember which specific highway it was on, but I seem to recall a sign being posted on one of the Milwaukee area freeways stating something to the effect of "No funeral processions beyond the next exit".

Personally, I'd like to see them retained. It's one of the few things that forces people to stop and reflect in our fast-paced, needed it yesterday society.

[Big John]

I cannot remember which specific highway it was on, but I seem to recall a sign being posted on one of the Milwaukee area freeways stating something to the effect of "No funeral processions beyond the next exit".

I think it is on I-94 EB in Brookfield at the Moorland Rd exit.

I think this is the sign but is very hard to read off Google maps: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0257092,-88.1180183,3a,75y,160.64h,96.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snrWGKoWUvEB4m4U7Zxyxcw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

[jeffandnicole]

For those of you who say ban them or reserve willful disobedience of traffic laws to emergency vehicles, what about processions of nothing but emergency vehicles? Ban them too? This one seems far longer than the processions I've seen or been a part of.

The last couple processions I've seen had a squad car providing some traffic control. The last one I was a part of had a funeral home car with mini lightbars leading and bringing up the tail end.

I cannot remember which specific highway it was on, but I seem to recall a sign being posted on one of the Milwaukee area freeways stating something to the effect of "No funeral processions beyond the next exit".

Personally, I'd like to see them retained. It's one of the few things that forces people to stop and reflect in our fast-paced, needed it yesterday society.

The important thing to note:  You saw how long that procession was.  Look at the length of the video...just 2 1/2 minutes. 

Processions seem a lot longer in people's minds than what they really are.

[oscar]

IIRC, the flame wars on MTR came about because some objected to the practice of oncoming traffic stopping to pay respects to the deceased/show sympathy for the survivors. That is a tradition in this part of Kentucky and I will most certainly stop and wait for the procession to pass if I meet one.

As 1995hoo pointed out, that can be a dangerous tradition, if out-of-area travelers are unfamiliar with local custom, and come upon a procession and traffic stopped for it before they can figure out what's going on. But if oncoming traffic can pull over out of the travel lane(s) to pay respects, that reduces the risk that one funeral will beget rear-enders (and perhaps more funerals).

The m.t.r. flame war I remember was triggered by complaints from those who ran a procession a very long distance over a turnpike (where they were unlikely to pass people who knew the deceased or the family), and wanted to blow through toll booths without paying so the procession could stay unbroken. I was, and still am, generally OK with shorter processions from the funeral service to the turnpike, and from the turnpike to the cemetery, but not on the turnpike itself. 

Those of you who have attended road meets, especially in the days before printed directions were common, where some in the caravan got lost can probably understand the reasoning behind an unbroken procession so everyone can make it to the cemetery for the graveside services that usually conclude a funeral.

I can remember a road meet where a convoy got broken up by red lights (in a rural area, but with enough traffic to require stoplights). Printed directions, and exchanges of cellphone numbers, became more popular after that experience. That was a learning experience for us, but hopefully funeral directors will have figured it out by now.

If a funeral director can get police to block intersections (and hopefully temporarily cover any red-light cameras) so a procession need not stop for red lights, and otherwise keep other traffic from interfering with the procession, great. But not always possible.

[US71]

My father's funeral, we chose to have no escort: we chose to drive ourselves, but there were only 3 cars.

[PHLBOS]

I'm more in favor of cremation myself.

0:09-0:50 might be of interest to you... particularly 0:36-0:43. 

[Scott5114]

I'm not much for ceremony, so I'm of the opinion that the problems processions cause (i.e. traffic behaving unpredictably and the delays) are not worth whatever benefits the participants get. Put simply, yes, the mourners are in a lot of grief, but who's to say that the other traffic isn't out on the road because they have something equally important to them that they're involved in? It's not fair to abrogate the rules of the road under a circumstance where time is not really of the essence. (It would be different if they're rushing to get somewhere to prevent a funeral.)

As for the "respect" argument–that may be fine in smaller towns but in larger ones the deceased is some anonymous person, most drivers will not only not know them, but probably never even encountered them in life. It's sad that some guy died, but it happens to 100% of the population eventually, and if you're not familiar with the person involved it's kind of hard to get worked up about. (That presumes the deceased is worth respecting anyway.)

[Pete from Boston]

I'm not much for ceremony, so I'm of the opinion that the problems processions cause (i.e. traffic behaving unpredictably and the delays) are not worth whatever benefits the participants get. Put simply, yes, the mourners are in a lot of grief, but who's to say that the other traffic isn't out on the road because they have something equally important to them that they're involved in? It's not fair to abrogate the rules of the road under a circumstance where time is not really of the essence. (It would be different if they're rushing to get somewhere to prevent a funeral.)

As for the "respect" argument–that may be fine in smaller towns but in larger ones the deceased is some anonymous person, most drivers will not only not know them, but probably never even encountered them in life. It's sad that some guy died, but it happens to 100% of the population eventually, and if you're not familiar with the person involved it's kind of hard to get worked up about. (That presumes the deceased is worth respecting anyway.)

There's a recurring tone based primarily in utility in many of the arguments against funeral processions.  Utility as in, what benefits more people should always overrule what benefits fewer.

But giving people–families, friend groups, organizations, whatever–the opportunity to have their moment of very benign ceremony to help process their grief, show some minor salute to the departed, and honor their mutual bond through that person strengthens society as a whole.

This topic of roads tends to draw folks focused on system optimization, engineering, efficiency, and individual opportunity.  I respect all of those things.  But if someone was sobbing and needed to get out of a restaurant, for example, and get a moment to gather themselves, you wouldn't stand in the doorway and say "wait your turn."  You'd step aside and hold the door like your mother should have taught you to.

Society, in other words, is not simply strengthened by practical function.  It's made better by having the class to defer to someone who is having a much rougher time of it than most today.


(Edit to bold the word that needs a little extra consideration in this issue.)

[1995hoo]

Regarding the tolls, when my father's mother died in 1995 (so prior to widespread E-ZPass), the hearse driver made sure the four or five cars in the procession were queued up behind him as we headed over the Cross Bay Bridge so he could pay the toll for everyone in the procession and the toll taker waved the other cars through. Worked pretty well, but might not be so practical for a long procession, especially if a ticket-system road were involved.

The thing about people stopping for processions going the other way is that some people apparently think they should stop in the lane of traffic. That's dangerous and rude. If you can pull off on the shoulder safely, then be my guest, but don't block the road.

[Scott5114]

I'm not much for ceremony, so I'm of the opinion that the problems processions cause (i.e. traffic behaving unpredictably and the delays) are not worth whatever benefits the participants get. Put simply, yes, the mourners are in a lot of grief, but who's to say that the other traffic isn't out on the road because they have something equally important to them that they're involved in? It's not fair to abrogate the rules of the road under a circumstance where time is not really of the essence. (It would be different if they're rushing to get somewhere to prevent a funeral.)

As for the "respect" argument–that may be fine in smaller towns but in larger ones the deceased is some anonymous person, most drivers will not only not know them, but probably never even encountered them in life. It's sad that some guy died, but it happens to 100% of the population eventually, and if you're not familiar with the person involved it's kind of hard to get worked up about. (That presumes the deceased is worth respecting anyway.)

There's a recurring tone based primarily in utility in many of the arguments against funeral processions.  Utility as in, what benefits more people should always overrule what benefits fewer.

But giving people–families, friend groups, organizations, whatever–the opportunity to have their moment of very benign ceremony to help process their grief, show some minor salute to the departed, and honor their mutual bond through that person strengthens society as a whole.

This topic of roads tends to draw folks focused on system optimization, engineering, efficiency, and individual opportunity.  I respect all of those things.  But if someone was sobbing and needed to get out of a restaurant, for example, and get a moment to gather themselves, you wouldn't stand in the doorway and say "wait your turn."  You'd step aside and hold the door like your mother should have taught you to.

Society, in other words, is not simply strengthened by practical function.  It's made better by having the class to defer to someone who is having a much rougher time of it than most today.


(Edit to bold the word that needs a little extra consideration in this issue.)

This is understandable, but in the restaurant scenario you give, there is the ability to communicate with the distraught person, and if you screw up and bump into the person, it's not going to potentially lead to injury.

Roads have rules governing them because the stakes are so much higher, and if people don't behave predictably death can occur. Funeral processions are something that you don't see every day, and in some cases may not be obvious (especially since the traditional way of designating them, headlights on in the day, is difficult to distinguish now that DRLs are common) so it may take time for a driver to recognize the situation and adapt to it. Normally, when you have a green light you are not expecting a line of cars to pass through the intersection from another direction.

If the procession were a line of people in a hallway, then yes, I would say that the polite thing to do is stand aside and allow them to pass. But since it's a line of cars in a street, safety should be the paramount concern, so safety devices like traffic signals should be obeyed.

[Duke87]

I've been known to use "funeral procession" (often accompanied by a couple of more colorful words) as an insult for any group of vehicles moving at an unnecessarily slow speed. So, yeah, you could say I'm not a fan of the practice.


Seems to me it would make much more sense for everyone to leave the church and head to the cemetery in the form of "here's the address, everyone meet there" rather than everyone following each other in a slow-moving caravan and creating a moving roadblock. This is, after all, typically how everyone gets from ceremony to reception at a wedding, a two-part two-location event of similar magnitude involving a similar group of people.

[Billy F 1988]

I would not want to ban funeral processions, however, having said that, I would require a multitude of changes as many of you point out. One out of such changes I think needs to be proposed is the limit of cars in this procession, say, not to exceed 15 vehicles, maybe? That may be a low number, but there has to be a set number and while I do understand that it's an inconvenience to some of the motoring public with these long processions, I do have to wonder though: how can we improve the flow of the procession? It's easy for some to offer 20/20 hindsight and draconian platitudes, but it's totally a different story when we actually put these thoughts into practice.

We can't necessarily ban processions as that would provide no means for the body of the deceased to be transported from the funeral home or morgue to the cemetery. Ok, yeah, I get it that some places are crowded and might not accommodate such a large group of vehicles at one time. Yeah, I get it that it's a burden to some of the motoring public, but out of emphasis, I don't think banning processions will help, but I do think that we need a better way to make these processions work more better so that it lessens the burden on the motoring public who are not directly involved with it. And this isn't just for funerals, mind you. We need to further discuss how we can better improve the conditions for every other kind of procession like weddings, athletic team parades, presidential tours, and so on.

[PHLBOS]

Seems to me it would make much more sense for everyone to leave the church and head to the cemetery in the form of "here's the address, everyone meet there" rather than everyone following each other in a slow-moving caravan and creating a moving roadblock. This is, after all, typically how everyone gets from ceremony to reception at a wedding, a two-part two-location event of similar magnitude involving a similar group of people.

One big difference with everyone going to the wedding reception vs. a funeral procession to the cemetery is (and I've attended both several times over the years so I know from personal experience) there is a lot more lag-time for a wedding reception.  Guests tend to arrive at a more leisurely fashion while the wedding party themselves doesn't arrive until later because they are involved in various photo shoots.  I remember one reception where there was at least an hour wait from the time the guests arrived and when the wedding party finally entered.

In contrast, since the final portion of the funeral at the cemetery doesn't start until everyone (in the procession) arrives; keeping everyone together (again, one must remember that many in attendance may not be familiar with the area and/or are not roadgeeks/enthusiasts) via a proceesion reduces the overall lag-time.

I asked this question (in general) earlier in this thread, but this time I will ask you personally; have you yourself been in a funeral procession (either as a driver or cognizant passenger) for the death of a family member or friend?  If your answer to that question is, No; then I think your opinions/attitude on this subject might change once you've participated in such.

Maybe one option for funeral homes/parlors can offer to alleviate procession-related issues would be to have a fleet of either vans or busses to transport friends & relatives en lieu of using their own individual vehicles.  One downside for such, would be that those in attendance would be forced to head back to the funeral home or house of worship to pick up their own vehicles when the cemetery ceremony has concluded rather than drive straight from the cemetery to home or wherever the post-funeral gathering is (if any).  The latter is, obviously, not part of funeral procession ceremonies.

[DaBigE]

We need to further discuss how we can better improve the conditions for every other kind of procession like weddings, athletic team parades, presidential tours, and so on.

A wedding procession?!?? Someone does that? Parades, presidential visits, etc. are a whole different story, since streets are shut down vs. occurring under live traffic like a funeral procession does.

One big difference with everyone going to the wedding reception vs. a funeral procession to the cemetery is (and I've attended both several times over the years so I know from personal experience) there is a lot more lag-time for a wedding recpetion.  Guests tend to arrive at a more leisurely fashion while the wedding party themselves doesn't arrive until later because they are involved in various photo shoots.  I remember one reception where there was at least an hour wait from the time the guests arrived and when the wedding party finally entered.

In contrast, since the final portion of the funeral at the cemetery doesn't start until everyone (in the procession) arrives; keeping everyone together (again, one must remember that many in attendance may not be familiar with the area and/or are not roadgeeks/enthusiasts) via a proceesion reduces the overall lag-time.

I asked this question (in general) earlier in this thread, but this time I will ask you personally; have you yourself been in a funeral procession (either as a driver or cognizant passenger) for the death of a family member or friend?  If your answer to that question is, No; then I think your opinions/attitude on this subject might change once you've participated in such.

Maybe one option for funeral homes/parlors can offer to alleviate procession-related issues would be to have a fleet of either vans or busses to transport friends & relatives en lieu of using their own individual vehicles.  One downside for such, would be that those in attendance would be forced to head back to the funeral home or house of worship to pick up their own vehicles when the cemetery ceremony has concluded rather than drive straight from the cemetery to home or wherever the post-funeral gathering is (if any).  The latter is, obviously, not part of funeral procession ceremonies.

Well said. In the wedding festivities we're currently planning, there will be at close to 2 hours between the ceremony and the reception. Even if the time was closer, most wedding parties travel by bus or limo.