Month: March 2023

Q: In our city of Kennewick there are several large signs near the street that include bright white lights at night. One is a large LED sign that flashes from subdued colors to mostly bright white, giving your eyes no time to adjust. Another has bright white lights that all blink at the same time, lighting up the area. Are there any safety laws to protect bright lights from interfering with a drivers’ eyesight at night?

A: In 1982, Ridley Scott’s movie, Blade Runner, envisioned a future (set in 2019) with flying cars, synthetic humans, and a Los Angeles population of 106 million people. He was way off on those three predictions, but he nailed one thing for sure: digital billboards. Their pervasive presence adds to the dystopian future that the film imagines. Twenty or so years after the release of Blade Runner, the first digital billboards started showing up along highways in the real world. Now digital signs are so abundant it feels like they’ve always been there.

Continue reading “Preventing Billboard Dystopia”

Q: I appreciate your appeal to people to improve safe driving behaviors but the framing about human error implied that it is the sole reason for traffic fatalities. Was that your intention? If so, this doesn’t fit with what I am hearing from the NTSB, USDOT, or WSDOT about the Safe System Approach. What about the responsibility of road designers and builders, vehicle manufacturers, and emergency responders?

A: I’m certain this question was prompted by the comment I made a few weeks ago about how driver error is a factor in 94 percent of fatal crashes. While true, it doesn’t tell the whole story. (Also, given how prone we are to mistakes, I’m surprised that even six percent of crashes don’t involve human error.) Fatal crashes are rarely attributable to a single factor. The crash itself might be caused by driver error, but the outcome depends on multiple circumstances, including road design, the safety features of the vehicle, and how quickly the ambulance shows up.

Continue reading “Embracing The Safe System Approach”

Q: What’s the appropriate following distance when you’re behind another car? Four seconds? Two seconds? Or a specific number of car-lengths? When does it become tailgating?

A: It depends. That’s not a helpful answer, is it? Washington law states that a driver “shall not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent,” which is a fancy way of saying, “It depends.” What then, does it depend on? The law goes on to say that drivers should have “due regard for the speed of such vehicles and the traffic upon and the condition of the highway.” Now we’re getting somewhere. We should follow at a safe distance, considering vehicle speeds and the conditions of the roadway. It becomes tailgating when the distance isn’t reasonable, but that still doesn’t get to what you’re asking.

Continue reading “Keeping Your Distance – Count Me In”

Last week I was accused of reinforcing ignorance for what I wrote or, more accurately, didn’t write about stopping in a roadway. And the person had a point. In case you missed it, I stated that “If you’re not coming up to a stop sign or traffic light, following the directions of a police officer, or avoiding conflict, you’re not allowed to stop in the roadway.” The problem isn’t that the law doesn’t say that – it does. But there are some exceptions found in other laws that I didn’t address.

Recently we’ve had a tragic increase in traffic fatalities, and the biggest rise was pedestrians killed in crashes. Even though last week’s topic wasn’t specifically about pedestrians, I missed an opportunity to encourage us all to do more to protect the most vulnerable people using our transportation infrastructure.

Continue reading “A Few More Times When it’s Okay to Stop in the Road”

Q: On my morning commute I often find myself behind a certain car that comes to a complete stop, not at stoplights, to let other cars enter from side roads and driveways. Ostensibly, the driver is doing this to be polite, but she’s really backing things up. The other day another car honked at her each time she stopped. She apparently didn’t like this, and “brake checked” the car several times. I think this driver is a menace; am I wrong?

A: Three traffic violations by two drivers in one question; well done. I’ve written before about politeness and driving, so you might already know where I stand. I’m a big fan of being kind while driving. And the kindest thing you can do is to follow the law. With that in mind, let’s work through the violations one at a time.

Continue reading “Brake Checking is a Menace”

Q: As someone who recently moved to Washington, I was surprised that there are no safety inspections. Wouldn’t we all be safer if all the cars on the road had properly operating lights and regulation equipment? Why are there no safety inspections as in other states?

A: Yes, vehicle inspections increase safety, but we can’t tell you how much. That was the conclusion of a study by the US Government Accountability Office. It’s hard to know if we should or shouldn’t do something when we don’t know how much it helps.

I can’t say for sure why Washington doesn’t have safety inspections, but I can explain why more states used to have them than do now. Money. The federal government used to withhold a percentage of highway funds from states without vehicle inspections. At the peak, 31 states had vehicle safety inspections. Washington was not one of them. In 1976 that rule changed, and now there are 16 states with annual or biannual inspections. States that still have inspections point out that they make their roads safer. States that have eliminated them say that the cost doesn’t justify the small (or possibly non-existent) increase in safety. States without inspections don’t seem to have more fatal crashes than those that do. Washington has a lower traffic fatality rate than ten of the 16 states with safety inspections.

Continue reading “Are Vehicle Safety Inspections Worth It?”