In these difficult economic times, employers who are looking for ways to cut costs may be overlooking a large savings that can be achieved rather easily and at a very low cost. That cost cutting method can be achieved through the institution of corporate driving safety policies and by educating not only employees but their families as well on the importance of driving safety.

No matter how dangerous the occupation, the most dangerous part of the day for any employee is the time spent behind the wheel, whether commuting to and from work or while driving as a part of their work duties. Traffic collisions after work hours by the employee or their family members also cost the employer in lost productivity and benefit costs.

The Network of Employees for Traffic Safety (NETS) has designated the week of October 3-7, 2011 as Drive Safely Work Week to educate employers and employees on the importance of driving safety. The NETS website contains a wealth of information for employers on the costs of traffic collisions and methods the employer can use to reduce traffic collisions by their employees and benefit-eligible dependents.

According to the NETS website's "10 Facts Every Employer Must Know," "In 2000, the economic cost of crashes to employers was $60 billion resulting in 3 million lost workdays. Two-thirds of the cost ($40 billion) was from on-the-job crashes while one-third ($20 billion) was from off-the-job crashes for employees and their benefit-eligible dependents.”

"The average on-the-job crash costs an employer about $16,500 or just under $0.16 per mile driven. Crashes involving injuries cost substantially more — $504,408 for a fatal injury and $73,750 for a nonfatal injury.”

"Damages awarded to plaintiff’s making negligence claims against companies are at an all time high, settlements of $1 million or more are not unusual."

The focus of 2011's Drive Safely Work Week, called "Focus 360" is on distracted driving. Distracted driving has been recognized over the past several years as one of the major safety issues on America's roads. The transformation of cell phones into mini-wireless computers has become the number one distracting force on the road and has led to a shockingly high number of collisions, injuries, and deaths. Add to that all of the other distracting activities that a driver can engage in and it is a wonder anyone is watching the road at all. A study by the Virginia Tech Traffic Safety Institute shows the following:

Behavior	Increased Crash Risk
Texting	23 Times
Reaching for a Moving Object	9 Times
Dialing a Cell Phone	6 Times
Driving Drowsy	4 Times
Looking at an External Object	3.7 Times
Reading	3.4 Times
Talking on a Cell Phone	4 Times
Applying Makeup	3 Times

If your company does not have a policy on distracted driving and cell phone use, you are encouraged to create one and vigorously enforce it.

Other steps that employers can take to institute their safe driving policies are to encourage their employees and their family members to attend driver training. Driver training classes, either online or in a classroom, can provide needed refresher training for employees and help them to refocus on what is really important behind the wheel. Providing such training can result in lower insurance costs for both the employer and the employee.

Labels: avoid distracted driving, drive safely work week, driver safety, driving drowsy, drowsy driving, traffic safety

Transportation America, a coalition of housing, business, environmental, public health, transportation, equitable development, and other organizations, has published a report on the dangers faced by pedestrians in the US. According to the study, while motor vehicle fatalities have gone down over the last several years, pedestrian death rates have fallen only marginally and, in some of the most dangerous cities, have actually risen.

Transportation America attributes the decrease in motor vehicle deaths to stronger laws, greater seat belt use, and efforts to reduce drunken and distracted driving but, according to the study, pedestrian safety has received very little attention from traffic safety and transportations experts at the state and federal level.

The study states that steps are not being taken to provide sidewalks and other safety measures for pedestrian traffic. According to the report, pedestrians make up nearly 12 percent of total traffic deaths. The study's authors state; "These deaths typically are labeled "accidents," and attributed to error on the part of motorist or pedestrian. In fact, however, the majority of these deaths share a common thread: they occurred along "arterial" roadways that were dangerous by design, streets engineered for speeding traffic with little or no provision for people on foot, in wheelchairs or on bicycles."

Using data on pedestrian deaths over the previous ten years and census data on walking, the study's authors created a Pedestrian Danger Index (PDI) to rank America's cities according to their risk to walkers.

The results are bad news for Florida. Four out of the top five most dangerous cities for pedestrians are in Florida. The cities ranked by their PDI are:







In Florida in 2009, more pedestrians were killed (466) than passengers in motor vehicles (453).








Remember, pedestrians in crosswalks always have the right-of-way. Even if you have the green light, you must wait for pedestrians to clear the crosswalk.

Be on the lookout for motorized wheelchairs on the road. With no sidewalks, a person in a wheelchair has nowhere else to go.

Blind pedestrians with a white cane or a guide dog always have the right-of-way. All traffic in both directions must stop when a blind person is crossing the road.

When driving, be on the lookout for pedestrians, especially around shopping areas, schools, and playgrounds. Don't assume that, because the pedestrian looks at you, that they won't step out into the road. The pedestrian may be assuming that you will stop.

Labels: crosswalk, driver safety, pedestrian right-of-way, pedestrian safety, right-of-way, traffic safety

Labels: driver safety, traffic collision, traffic crashes, traffic safety

Allstate Insurance Company released their annual report on the best and worst cities in which to drive. The study looked at Allstate collision claims and compared them to the national average and ranked the nation’s cities by population. To prevent any type of special event such as floods and hurricanes from skewing the results, the Allstate actuaries analyzed figures over a two year period to reach their results.

 The list shows a driver’s likelihood to be involved in a collision and the average number of years a driver in that city can expect to go between collisions. Based on their results, the most dangerous cities in America for drivers, in terms of ranking, are:

 1. Washington, DC – A driver in Washington can expect only 4.8 years between collisions and the chances for being involved in a collision are 107.3 percent more than the national average.

2. Baltimore, Maryland - A driver in Baltimore can expect only 5.3 years between collisions and the chances for being involved in a collision are 88.7 percent more than the national average.

3. Glendale, California - A driver in Glendale can expect only 5.5 years between collisions and the chances for being involved in a collision are 80.8percent more than the national average.

4. Newark, New Jersey - A driver in Newark can expect only 5.9 years between collisions and the chances for being involved in a collision are 70.8 percent more than the national average.

5. Providence, Rhode Island - A driver in Providence can expect only 6.0 years between collisions and the chances for being involved in a collision are 66.7 percent more than the national average.

 The complete Allstate report can be seen at: http://allstatenewsroom.com/releases/00c90674-c797-4dd0-82c8-3813ccbe1e1e:en-US/download/e3fc06ab-a016-4248-89ef-72454729bd0a

Labels: driver safety, traffic collision, traffic safety

In 1817, Baron von Drais invented a walking machine that would help him get around the royal gardens faster: two same-size in-line wheels, the front one steerable, mounted in a frame which you straddled. The device was propelled by pushing your feet against the ground, thus rolling yourself and the device forward in a sort of gliding walk. The machine became known as the Draisienne or hobby horse. Von Drais' invention was the embryonic phase of what came to be known as the bicycle through its many variations.

The bicycle has played a prominent part in our childhood, youth, and even adulthood. It was through learning how to ride a bicycle that many of us first felt an exhilarating feeling of operating a moving mode of transportation. It propelled us to make friends, get good exercise, and appreciate the outdoors. In communities across the world, there is a growing need and responsibility to provide options that give people the opportunity to bike more often, and to bike to more places. The benefits of riding a bicycle - whether for utilitarian or recreational purposes—can be expressed in terms of improved environmental and personal health, reduced traffic congestion, enhanced quality of life, economic rewards, as well as others.

Nevertheless, there are risks involved when bicyclists do not follow bicycle safety tips and break traffic laws. In 2008, 716 bicyclists were killed and an additional 52,000 were injured in traffic crashes. Bicyclist deaths accounted for two percent of all traffic fatalities, and bicyclists made up two percent of all the people injured in traffic crashes during the year. Even though many of those were caused by motor vehicle driver error, a bicyclist must always be in tune to the defensive side of riding a bike. It's not always as easy as it seems, and maybe its not like "riding a bike" or maybe it is if you get in the habit of riding safely.

The following are some bicycle safety tips from the NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) that should be followed in going through and continuing the cycle of bicycle safety.

Protect Your Head; Wear a Helmet - Never ride a bicycle without wearing a properly fitted helmet. Helmets are proven to be 85-88 percent effective in preventing traumatic brain injury, the primary cause of death and disabling injuries resulting from cycling crashes.

Assure Bicycle Readiness, Ensure Proper Size and Function of Bicycle - Use a bicycle that fits you, and check all parts of the bicycle to make sure they are secure and working well.

Ride Wisely, Learn and Follow the Rules of the Road - Bicyclists are considered vehicle operators on the road and must follow traffic laws that apply to motor vehicles. Always ride with traffic and obey traffic lights, signs, speed limits, and lane markings. Know your traffic laws found in the state drivers’ licensing handbook. Signal in advance of a turn, use correct hand signals so others can anticipate your actions. Yield to pedestrians and other vehicles, as appropriate. If you choose to ride on a sidewalk, take extra caution at driveways and other intersections. Check for traffic by looking left-right-left before entering a street. Control your speed by using your brakes. If your bicycle has hand brakes, apply the rear brakes slightly before the front brakes.

Be Predictable, Act like a Driver of a Vehicle - Always ride with the flow of traffic, on the right side of the road, and as far to the right of the road as is practical and safe. Motorists do not expect to see traffic coming in the opposite direction or on the sidewalk. When motorists don’t expect to see you, they may pull across your path or turn into you, causing a crash. Ride straight and do not swerve in a lane or in and out of traffic.

Be Visible: See and Be Seen at All Times- Always assume you are not seen by others. To enhance your visibility at night or in low-visibility conditions: wear neon & fluorescent colors, wear special clothing from reflective materials, and install bicycle reflectors on both the front & back of your bicycle. Remember that young children should be discouraged from riding at night.

"Drive" with Care, Share the Road - Choose to ride in the bike lane, if available. If the roadway or bike lane is wide, ride to the right; if the lane is narrow, you may choose to ride in the middle of the lane just like a motorized vehicle. Take extra precautions when riding on a roadway: make eye contact, smile, or wave to communicate with motorists; be considerate and aware of motorists and pedestrians, learn to anticipate their actions, and remember that pedestrians do have the right of way; ride far enough from the curb to avoid the unexpected from parked cars; keep control of your bicycle, look behind you while maintaining your bicycle in a straight path; always look over your shoulder, and if possible, signal before changing lanes; use bells, horns, or your voice to alert pedestrians and bicyclists that you are approaching or passing.

Stay Focused, Stay Alert - Never wear headphones or use an I-Pod while riding, they hinder your ability to hear traffic. Always look for obstacles in your path (potholes, cracks, railroad tracks, or anything that could make you fall). Be aware of the traffic around you, ride defensively. Use extra care when riding in wet weather, slow your speed and allow extra time to stop. Use caution when crossing a railroad track; cross tracks at a 90-degrees angle and proceed slowly.

By constantly following & applying the magnificent seven bicycle safety messages on the "cycle of bicycle safety", you can play an imperative role in reducing fatalities & injuries to bicyclists and be breaking away from danger.

Labels: bicycle safety, bicyclists, bike safety, traffic safety

The Yellow Dot program is being implemented in counties across the country. The relatively simple idea has proven to be an effective way to relay information to the emergency response teams in the event of an accident. Participants in the Yellow Dot program place a yellow sticker on the bottom left corner of their vehicle’s rear window. This sticker lets emergency response crews know to check the vehicle’s glove compartment for important medical information regarding the vehicle’s driver.

It’s plain to see why the Yellow Dot program is beneficial in the unfortunate case of a serious, life threatening accident where the victim is unable to speak to the emergency workers. But, it can also be a vital tool in less serious accidents. Sometimes, people are in shock after an accident and they find it difficult to remember specific information. It would lower the risk of error in treatment is the emergency workers had immediate access to important medical information.

The first Yellow Dot program was initiated in Connecticut in 2002. To date, several counties across eight states have developed Yellow Dot programs of their own. Most of the programs have qualities that set them apart from other yellow dot programs; however the premise is the same.

For example, in Connecticut, the Yellow Dot decal indicates that emergency workers should look for an envelop containing a card with important medical information on it. In Colbert County, Alabama the yellow dot directs emergency workers o the glove compartment to look for a folder containing important medical information as well as a picture of the person the information pertains to. Obviously, including the picture will allow the emergency response team to quickly determine if they are looking at the individual the information pertains to.

In Alabama, the Yellow Dot program is available to drivers of all ages. However, a version of the program implemented in Kansas is geared toward seniors aged 55 and over. Again, the decal on the back window directs first responders to important medical and emergency contact information stored in the glove compartment.

Learn more about driver safety and defensive driving through the National Safety Commission Alerts by signing up for our newsfeed today.

Labels: driver education, driver safety, driver safety tips, emergency, emergency vehicle, first responders, traffic safety

Few issues have riled up motorists over the past few years as much as the issue of red light cameras. On one side are those in favor of red light cameras and on the other are those who claim the cameras are just a way for municipalities to increase their revenue and that the cameras are a violation of a motorist’s rights. There is also conflicting data on whether or not the cameras actually reduce the rate of collisions at red lights.

The Problem

One issue that is not really in dispute is the fact that red light running has grown to epidemic proportions in the U.S. According to studies cited by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS);

• 55.8 percent of Americans admit to running red lights; yet;
  
• 96 percent of drivers were afraid of being hit by a red light runner.
  
• In 2007, almost 900 people were killed and an estimated 153,000 were injured in crashes that involved red light running.
  
• About half of the deaths in red light running crashes are pedestrians and occupants in other vehicles who are hit by the red light runners.
  
• Motorists are more likely to be injured in urban crashes involving red light running than in other types of urban crashes.
  
• Occupant injuries occurred in 45 percent of red light running crashes, compared with 30 percent of other crash types.
  
• Analysis of red light violation data from 19 intersections (without red light cameras) in four states found that, per intersection, motorists ran red lights at an average rate of 3.2 per hour.
  

Red Light Cameras Increase Rather Than Reduce Collisions at Red Lights

Some have claimed that use of red light cameras actually increase the number of rear end collisions because drivers don't expect someone ahead to stop for a yellow light; however the facts don't bear that out. According to the National Campaign to Stop Red Light Running, the opposite is true. Their web site lists the following figures for some cities that operate red light cameras:

• New Orleans, LA - red light cameras led to an 85% drop in red light running and speed cameras led to an 84% drop in speeding.
  
• Montgomery County, MD - relative to comparison sites drivers traveling more than 10 mph above posted speed limits declined by about 70% at locations with both warning signs and speed camera enforcement.
  
• Council Bluffs, IA - a 90% reduction in red light running crashes.
  
• Washington, DC - red light running fatalities were reduced from 16 to 2 in the first two years of red light cameras.
  
• Fairfax, VA - a 44% reduction in red light running crashes.
  
• Oxnard, CA - a 22% reduction in red light crashes citywide.
  
• New York City - a 34% reduction in red light violations.
  

Red Light Cameras Are Just A Way for Cities to Make More Money

Some municipalities did experience an increase in revenue after installing cameras and found them to be a profitable enterprise; at first. However, after drivers realized cameras were installed and started stopping for red lights, revenues fell sharply; in some cases, costing more money than they earned. Cities that install cameras as a revenue generator are installing them for the wrong reasons and will certainly be disappointed. Cities who install the cameras to cut down on the death and injury rate at intersections find that they pay off in other ways:

• The cost of posting police officers at each intersection 24 hours a day would be prohibitive.
  
• Fewer collisions lead to lower costs for law enforcement and fire/rescue services.
  
• Fewer collisions mean fewer traffic jams and greater productivity.
  
• Fewer injuries mean lower hospital and emergency room costs for taxpayers.
  
• New Federal Highway Administration research estimates total societal cost reductions from red light cameras to be over $14 million per year, or $38,000 for each U.S. red light camera location.
  

California, recognizing that the purpose of red light cameras is to save lives, passed a law that keeps cities from installing cameras in order to generate revenue and their law could serve as a model for other states. California’s red light camera law requires that municipalities issue warning tickets only for the first 30 days that a camera is in operation. This gives motorists time to realize the camera is there and stop on their own. The law also requires that the contract between a city and a camera operator cannot provide any financial incentive to the operator to issue more tickets.

Red Lights Are an Invasion of Privacy

The Supreme Court has held that there is not a reasonable expectation of privacy when an individual is in public; someone who is breaking the law on a city street should not be able to hide behind the Fourth Amendment. Red light cameras do not run constantly and do not take pictures of every vehicle. They only take photos of cars that are running the red light. Motorists who stop for the red light don’t have to fear that the camera will take their picture.

They're Illegal

State Supreme Courts are divided on this issue with some courts deciding that use of cameras violate state law as currently written and other state courts finding that municipalities can use the cameras even if state law says nothing about the issue.

States could solve the legal issues surrounding red light camera by creating legislation and providing policy guidance to cities. The Governor's Highway Administration web site provides a lot of information on the issue along with policy and guidance for states. It's hard to calculate the cost of lives, injuries, and property damage that never happen. If this technology can save one life, it is worth the cost.

Labels: red light camera, traffic crashes, traffic laws, traffic safety, traffic violations

The shock of $4.00 gas prices last summer and the state of the economy has a lot of new car buyers looking at the so called micro or mini cars such as the Mercedes Smart Car, Toyota Yaris and the Honda Fit as a way to save on gas during long commutes. Long available in Europe, the popularity of these cars in the US is growing with more and more of them appearing on America's roads. While very fuel efficient, it appears that the micro cars may not be safe enough for American-style traffic and driving conditions.

Recently, the Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) conducted crash tests on the Smart Car, the Yaris and the Fit. Instead of testing them against large trucks or SUVs, the IIHS chose to test their crash worthiness by crashing them at 40 mph into a mid-sized sedan made by the same manufacturer. The test results showed that the micro cars performed poorly in protecting the vehicle occupants in a crash.

In a crash with a Honda Accord against the Fit, injuries to the test dummies indicated that there was a high probability of major injury to both legs. The dummy's head also went through the airbag, striking the steering column. Intrusion into the passenger compartment rated this vehicle a poor rating.

The testers crashed the Toyota Yaris against a Camry. While the Camry performed well, the Yaris suffered significant intrusion into the passenger compartment and the door was almost torn off. The dummy’s head struck the steering wheel through the airbag and there was evidence of extensive injury to the neck and legs.

In a crash against a Mercedes C class, the Smart Fortwo went airborne and spun 450 degrees, leading to possible multiple injuries due to rebound. There was significant intrusion and both the dashboard and steering wheel were displaced and moved upward toward the dummy. There were measures of multiple injuries to the head and legs of the dummy.

While the mid-sized counterparts all fared in the acceptable range, all three of the micro cars were rated as poor. The physics involved in a crash like this are relatively easy for anyone to understand. The larger and faster an object is, the more damage it will impart on a smaller, lighter object.

Micro cars have been around a long time in Europe and their popularity there is a result of the different driving styles between Europe and the US. In Europe, there are fewer cars on the road, with people depending instead on the excellent public transportation systems available there. Most cars in Europe also tend to be smaller, leveling the playing field in crashes between vehicles. Europeans also tend to live in cities and, on average, have much shorter commuting distances than their American cousins who tend to live far out in the suburbs and depend on high speed limited access highways for their daily commute. Fewer miles traveled at slower speeds leads to fewer and less severe crashes.

While these vehicles may contain all the latest safety options such as electric stability control, air bags and improved seat belts, they are still at greater risk due to their light construction and less room between the driver and the front of the vehicle in a crash. Advocates say that more of these vehicles would lead to fewer injuries as larger cars are removed from the road. However, almost half of the deaths in these types of cars were in single vehicle crashes off the road or against a barrier and their light construction does little to protect vehicle occupants in this type of crash.

If you want to save money on gas and especially if you are purchasing a car for a teen or college bound child, there are vehicles available that get reasonably good mileage while offering better protection to the vehicle occupants. You can view videos of the crash tests performed on the micro vehicles and, if you are shopping for a particular car, you can search for crash worthiness results by vehicle year, model, or size at the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety's web site.

Labels: micro cars, mini cars, suv safety, traffic safety, vehicle safety

More and more municipalities are installing red light cameras (RLCs) and as their use grows so does the controversy surrounding their use. Recent articles report that some drivers complain that RLCs violate their right to privacy and there have been reports of angry drivers striking back by disabling RLCs, or buying special sprays or license plate covers to blur their license plate.

Lawmakers are complaining too. Some cities are voting to remove the cameras because, with the lower incidence of red light running, they cost too much without the ticket revenue to pay for them.

To fully understand some of these issues it is helpful to first, understand what red light running is and why the cameras were seen to be necessary in the first place.
Red light running is a form of aggressive driving that has grown to epidemic proportions over the last 20 years. An act that was rarely, if ever, seen by older drivers is now seen on a daily basis.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) cites a study conducted at 19 intersections (without red light cameras) over four states showing that people were running red lights at a rate of 3.2 per hour. The IIHS states that more people are likely to be injured by red light runners than by any other type of urban crash. The National Highway Traffic Administration reported that almost 900 people were killed and an estimated 153,000 were injured in crashes that involved red light running in 2007. About half of the deaths in red light running crashes are pedestrians and occupants in other vehicles who are hit by the red light runners. A study by Old Dominion University in Virginia (ODU) showed that 55.8 percent of Americans admit to running red lights; yet 96 percent of drivers were afraid of being hit by a red light runner.

The IIHS states that studies show that RLCs cut down on the incidence of red light running dramatically however one study that has gained the most attention claims that RLCs increase the number of collisions at the intersections where they have been installed.

A frank discussion of all of these issues is in order:

Red Light Cameras increase the number of collisions at intersections – The study cited by those who want to do away with RLCs did show that, once drivers became aware of the presence of an RLC, there was a slight increase in low velocity rear-end collisions by drivers who assumed the car ahead wouldn’t stop. The data clearly shows that the incidents of high velocity side collisions (commonly called "T-bone collisions") by red light runners are dramatically reduced at intersections where RLCs are installed. A low impact rear-end collision is far more survivable than a high velocity T-bone collision.
ODU also conducted a unique study of intersections in Virginia Beach VA where they had the opportunity to study red light runners before an RLC was installed, during the time the RLC was in operation, and after the law providing for the RLC expired and the cameras were removed. The study showed that the number of crashes decreased during the time the RLCs were operational but, once the lights were removed, the number of red light runners increased by 3.59 percent within one year. It seemed that once aggressive divers were no longer worried about being photographed, they ran the lights more than ever.

Red Light Cameras are a drain on city revenues. – Cities that initially experienced an increase in revenues from RLCs become dismayed when, as the incidents of red light running decrease, they stop generating revenue and become an unexpected revenue loser. Cities that install RLCs as a way of generating money seem to be seeking the wrong goal. The deaths and permanently disabling injuries prevented should be the goal of RLCs. We pay large sums of money each year to hire and equip police officers in the hope that, by their mere presence, they will prevent crime from happening in the first place and very few complain about that cost. RLCs act as a permanent police presence working tirelessly 24/7. If we were to compare the cost of an RLC with the cost of posting police officers at an intersection 24 hours a day it would quickly become apparent that RLCs are a bargain. The IIHS says that the cost of red light running in America is approximately 7 billion dollars per year. It is difficult to determine how much money is saved by an event that never happens and prevention should be the goal.

Red Light Cameras are a violation of privacy. - The Supreme Court has held that no one has a reasonable expectation of privacy for acts conducted in public. If you are out on a city street, you can’t hide behind the Constitution's guarantee against unreasonable searches and seizures, especially when you are breaking the law. Those irate drivers who have tried to damage or disable RLCs aren’t valiant defenders of the fourth amendment but rather, vandals who are destroying tax payer property.

Security cameras of all types have become so common that we usually forget that they are there and no one seems to complain because we know they are there to protect us. RLCs only take pictures of those drivers who are running the red light; not those who are obeying the law. The nightly news never shows the guy who went into a convenience store to buy a big gulp; only the armed thug who came in to rob the store. Those who are worried about their privacy should obey the law.

The studies show that RLCs save lives. Attitudes toward them might be different if it was your spouse or child who was injured or killed by a red light runner.

Labels: red light camera, RLC, traffic laws, traffic safety

How bad of a problem are distracted drivers? A landmark study for the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety conducted by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute in 2006 found that nearly 80 % of crashes and 65% of near crashes involved some sort of driver inattention within 3 seconds of the event. The majority of the incidents involved drivers who took their eyes off of the road ahead for more than two seconds. Two seconds might not seem like a long time until you consider that a car traveling at 40 mph will travel more than 117 feet during that time.

Distracted driving has become so problematic that two states, Connecticut and New Hampshire along with the District of Columbia, have passed laws making distracted/negligent driving a traffic offense. Other states are considering similar legislation. Maine’s legislature is considering a bill outlawing the use of electronic devices, applying cosmetics, performing personal grooming or any other distractions as determined by local law enforcement. Six states have now banned the use of hand-held cell phones and 19 states have totally banned the use of cell phones for teenage drivers. The Governors Highway Safety Association is calling on all states to pass legislation prohibiting certain distracting activities along with pushing for increased awareness and education on the issue.

New technology designed to improve driving safety and to prevent collisions may be of some help. Some of the new technologies include:

• Adaptive Cruise Control that uses forward looking radar to determine the distance from the car ahead, automatically slowing the vehicle when the distance narrows and regaining speed when traffic conditions are safe.


• Collision Avoidance with Brake Support sounds an alarm, activates a warning light and pre-charges the brakes assist system in case the driver needs to slam on the brakes.


• Adaptive Headlamps that pivot in the direction of travel allowing better vision on curves.


• Lane Departure Warning Systems that alert a driver if they are veering out of their lane.


• Blind Spot Detection Systems that warn of other vehicles in your blind spot.

Other technology being developed uses in car cameras that can detect when a driver's eyes are off the road too long or if the driver is becoming drowsy. This system warns the driver and suggests taking a break from driving.

All of this technology is great but the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety warns that some of these new technologies may make a driver feel as if the car is on auto-pilot allowing them to become more complacent or to feel that they can take even greater risks.

Brain scan studies show that our brains really aren't adapted to multi-tasking especially when we are driving. So what is the best crash avoidance strategy? Multiple studies show that driver attention on the road ahead is the key to safe driving. Getting plenty of rest before driving, not using cell phones or other wireless devices, keeping both hands on the wheel and both eyes on the road are the key. Driving is really a very complex task and the bottom line is that, in spite of all the new technology, driver error is and will continue to be the primary reason for traffic crashes.

Labels: collisions, distracted driving, driving, traffic safety

U.S. Drivers Log 100 Billion Fewer Miles Last Year

Despite a drop gas prices, drivers recorded 9 billion fewer miles on the nation's roads in October, suggesting the driving downturn that began a year ago is caused by more than just energy costs.

Recently released Federal Highway Administration data reveals the number of miles driven dropped 3.5 percent in October compared with the same month in 2007. Between November 2007, when the driving decline commenced, and October, U.S. drivers logged 100 billion fewer miles. The nation has never experienced a larger continuous decline in driving.

According to the Energy Information Administration, gas prices averaged $3.15 a gallon in October, down from a high of $4.09 in July.

Transportation Secretary Mary Peters said, "The fact that the trend persists even as gas prices are dropping confirms that America's travel habits are fundamentally changing."

The data show that a block of eight states and Washington, D.C. - the South Atlantic - experienced the largest decline in October of any region, 5 percent fewer vehicle miles. The 8.4 percent driving decline in Montana was the largest of any state, followed by Utah with 7.4 percent, and South Carolina with 6.7 percent.

The driving data is collected by highway administration from more than 4,000 automatic traffic recorders operated around-the-clock by state highway agencies.

Subways, buses, commuter rail and light-rail systems have reported record increases in ridership since the driving decline began. The nation's intercity passenger railroad, Amtrak, said it transported the highest number of passengers and brought in the most revenue during fiscal 2008 in its 37-year history.

David Goldberg, a spokesman for Transportation for America, a coalition of groups pressing for more alternatives to driving, said the economic crisis is likely an important factor in the driving decline.

"We regularly see fewer trips being made in economic downturns," Goldberg said. "I think when we probe these numbers we'll find that a lot of people have figured out how to telework or how to go into the office fewer days. And having experienced that and made that work, I think they'll continue to save the money and the time and effort and reduce some of those trips."

Peters expressed concern that the decline in driving is creating a gap between federal gas tax revenues and the government's commitments to fund state and local highway construction and repair projects. To cover an expected shortfall in the fund, Congress made an emergency infusion of $8 billion earlier this year from the general treasury.

"As driving decreases and vehicle fuel efficiency continues to improve, the long-term viability of the Highway Trust Fund grows weaker," Peters said.

According to federal safety officials, auto fatalities dropped almost 10 percent in 2008 through October, a trend that is no doubt influenced by the driving decline.

Along with motor vehicle safety, driver education helps ensure the safety of Americans. Whether you're getting your Commercial Drivers License, your Learner's Permit, or your Motorcycle License, America's Driver's License Headquarters is TestQuestionsandAnswers.com.

Labels: auto fatalities, driving, traffic safety