Penalties for Traffic Accidents

[CrazyEyez]

When you cause an accident during rush hour on a major artery, you affect 100s if not 1000s of people with your carelessness.

I propose that my metropolitan area designate key stretches of the major highways and peak traffic times. If you crash within these parameters, you should be receive a severe penalty, like a $5k fine. Kind of like the "Speeding fines double in work zones" signs you see, only much more harsh.

What say you to this proposal?

[Oatdyke McFluff]

Be a little less reactionary.

[econophile]

There is a study about this by Aaron S. Edlin and Pinar Karaca-Mandic in the latest issue of the JPE. Here's the abstract:

[ QUOTE ]
We estimate auto accident externalities (more specifically insurance externalities) using panel data on state-average insurance premiums and loss costs. Externalities appear to be substantial in traffic-dense states: in California, for example, we find that the increase in traffic density from a typical additional driver increases total statewide insurance costs of other drivers by $1,725–$3,239 per year, depending on the model. High–traffic density states have large economically and statistically significant externalities in all specifications we check. In contrast, the accident externality per driver in low-traffic states appears quite small. On balance, accident externalities are so large that a correcting Pigouvian tax could raise $66 billion annually in California alone, more than all existing California state taxes during our study period, and over $220 billion per year nationally.


[/ QUOTE ]

[BreakfastBurrito]

People love their cars. The inherent benefit of not crashing them is high enough that a large fine will do nothing but provide an excess financial burden on people when they do get in to accidents.

I've often daydreamed when sitting in rush hour traffic about ways to possibly make people drive better and move traffic along faster. On the key stretches of highways, I believe there are some things that could be done such as variable speed limits depending on traffic conditions, markings to represent a minimum distance between cars and a highway patrol presence to enforce tailgating violations, as well as better designed merges could all have people driving more efficiently and more safely as well.

[XXXNoahXXX]

[ QUOTE ]
a highway patrol presence

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, great idea. Too bad even when the speed limit is 65, morons slow down to 55 as soon as they see highway patrol/state police.

Don't they get that if the Speed Limit is 65, they can go 65!


Putting more patrol out there will cause nothing but people to drive slower when theres little traffic, exaclty what I don't want.

[CrazyEyez]

Burrito I can't say I like your ideas. I'm talking about places where traffic is bad anyway. So maybe on a normal day you're going like 30mph. Now some jackass is riding someone's bumper and rear-ends him. The accident may or may not block a lane of traffic, plus you get the gawker slowdown. Traffic grinds to a near halt for the next 30 minutes.

I don't see any of your suggestions as a solution/deterrant to this problem. I see fear of $5k fine as possible incentive for people to pay more attention on the road.

[BreakfastBurrito]

[ QUOTE ]
I see fear of $5k fine as possible incentive for people to pay more attention on the road.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is where I'm disagreeing with you. There's already a huge natural incentive not to get into an accident. You'll have to pay your deductible plus more if you don't have collision insurance, your insurance rates will go up, you may have to rent a car or find some alternate mode of transportation while there are repairs, not to mention the risk of severe personal injury or death. A $5k fine will just be insult to injury, not an incentive to drive safely as if there isn't one already.

From what I see, most of traffic is caused (aside from the obvious excess volume) by brake propagation delays, tailgating, and uncooperative merging. My thinking is that if we could somehow increase the distances cars put between themselves and have some way of enforcing this distance, traffic flow would improve, merging would be easier and there would be fewer instances of people slamming on brakes just because they're tailgating and starting a huge backup. Accidents would reduce as a result as well. The matter of creating an effective and enforceable system to accomplish this would be a huge challenge though.

[Hiding]

Their called "accidents" should you get fined 500 bucks for stubbing your toe? Yes they are a PITA to everyone caught in the slowdown, but it happens.

[neuroman]

I think a better solution would be to have giant helicopters with electromagnets on them grab the offending cars off of the highway and dump them in the nearest lake.

[Crveballin]

How about an easily portable black curtain that cops can put up around the accidents to prevent gauwkers from looking at the accident/car pulled over?