I saw a bumper sticker that said, “If you’re not outraged then you’re not paying attention.” I could not agree more, especially as it relates to driving a motor vehicle. A 30-minute cruise down any major highway (and certainly no less on interior roads) is bursting at the seams with instances of legal infractions. Everywhere you look, people are breaking traffic laws. Too, I would like to point out that I am not raising a fuss about breaking laws on the mere basis of the fact that they are laws. I despise the perspective that laws should be followed because they are laws. Laws should be followed because they promote public safety. No realm of society witnesses examples of laws suited for this purpose more than transportation.
Motor vehicles are far more dangerous than most people will concede: Frames of impactable metal barreling along at reckless speeds, each one at the fickle whim of any common citizen (or non-citizen, not that that makes a difference). You wouldn’t let a perfect stranger drive your car, but you let a perfect stranger drive his or her car within meters of your car, as long as you are driving. You can handle anything, right?
There is not a solitary traffic law that is not solidly grounded in the ideal of safety. Yet few laws seem to be more frequently and desultorily violated than these (perhaps with the exception of copying and distributing music). Examples include speeding, following too close, changing lanes without signaling, making a right turn on red where prohibited, “making” a yellow light, running a red light (just barely, usually), gliding through stop signs, cutting people off, driving in the bike lane (it’s not a turn lane, but that’s another tirade), and many others.
I am not interested in speculating on the multifarious reasons people have for breaking these laws, where reasons can be determined at all (though this is a very interesting topic), except to say this: It does not stem solely from a “driver’s mentality,” but from the mentality of people in general. I was in Erik’s Bike Shop today and a young, fraternity t-shirt wearing fellow exclaimed in a proud and boisterous voice, “I don’t need a bike light because I’m a bad-ass.” I thought, “I think you mean dumb-ass,” but didn’t say it because I was too far away. But boy, I wanted to say it. The point is that it isn’t just motor vehicle drivers who are inclined to break the laws.
The solution to all this, at least in my opinion, is mandatory driving tests every 5 years. It appalls me that a single meager driver’s test is administered once in a person’s life, then that person is left to his to her own devices for the following 70-plus years of driving (assuming that person lives so long and assuming he or she doesn’t incur legal penalties that demand a new exam, which is statistically rare). All too quickly do people fall into easy habits of carelessness, precipice, and illegality. Probably most people (unlike the dark haired, slightly unshaven moron in Erik’s who I would call out by name if I knew it) do not seek out behavior that breaks the law. In all likelihood, they don’t even realize it. This is because they have developed behavior that is habitual, whether legal or not. This is the main reason that mandatory driver’s tests would be successful in curbing traffic violations. People would think, “Oh…I have a driver’s test coming up in a year and a half. I had better get in the habit of signaling, or I won’t get renewed.” And that would be the consequence. If a person fails their quintennial driving test, he or she would lose their license until the test is passed. Perhaps after some number of failings the person would be required to attend some course comparable or identical to driver’s ed.
The very unfortunate thing is that such a system will never prevail because the motivation behind traffic laws is only partially to promote public safety; it is also to generate money for the governmental body that enforces the laws. Therefore, implementing mandatory driving tests would increase public safety and decrease traffic violations, but would diminish the revenue obtained by the government.
Perhaps a happy compromise could be reached by removing the mandatory nature of such tests and encouraging driver’s insurance companies to provide incentives for renewing one’s license. If, for example, an insurance company required that its customers take such a test, the resulting score could determine the driver’s premium. This would result in fewer traffic violations, cheaper insurance for responsible drivers, and a decreased liability to insurance providers. Just a thought.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
People who don't use turn signals to change lanes, or even turn, are among the top of my list of pet peeves.
I consider myself a safe driver. I follow at safe distances, I signal, I don't speed--much. I don't even tap my brakes when someone is tailgaiting me (though, the person behind me does tend to get a little angry when they get sprayed by my windshield wiper fluid). My insurance knows I'm a good driver--I pay $36 a month for a decent plan, and that's going to lower in May.
You wouldn’t let a perfect stranger drive your car, but you let a perfect stranger drive his or her car within meters of your car, as long as you are driving. You can handle anything, right?
this completely doesn't apply to me. Other drivers scare the living daylights out of me sometimes.
I agree with you that mandatory driving tests should be administered every 5 years. Your plan to get insurance companies involved in implementing this is a good one.
I really liked this blog. I especially liked how you offered a reasonable soution, rather than just writing about how the way things are now isn't good enough. Thanks for the read. :-)
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/sawaboof
"...There is a crushing guilt that comes with being a Catholic. Whether things are good or bad or you're simply... eating tacos in the park, there is always the crushing guilt."
-30 Rock-
Me too! At the beginning of last school year I was commuting over an hour to the school I was teaching in, mostly on highway, but also on some more rural roads as I got closer to the school. People drive absolutely ridiculously on the highway, and turn signals are apparently a thing of the past. I personally use turn signals EVERY time I turn. They're meant to help others see what you're thinking, and what you're planning on doing in your car.
I'm not sure about the tests being administered every 5 years, maybe instead they should be administered whenever you need to renew your license. In New York State you must renew your license at age 21, and then after that I think every 9 or 10 years. So you would take your initial test after you complete all of the of the requirements while you have your permit. Then you would get kind of a check-up test a few years later when you turned 21. Then after that you would have to pass a test to make sure that you've maintained the good driving that you had early on.
It might be hard to get this kind of idea into action right away though, especially since the driving requirements and ages are determined by states, not the federal government. But its definitely a good idea to help improve the quality of drivers and reduce the number of car accidents.
In Arizona, you renew your license when you turn 65. My license expires 2048. Sometimes people think it's fake because of that when I go out of state and am carded. Because it's so ridiculous.
aside from that, when you renew your license would also be a good time to take a mandatory driving test. ;-)
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/sawaboof
"...There is a crushing guilt that comes with being a Catholic. Whether things are good or bad or you're simply... eating tacos in the park, there is always the crushing guilt."
-30 Rock-