© 2007 by Michael Swickard, Ph.D.
It is odd that we Americans are so sensitive to battlefield deaths yet accept 40 times as many fatalities on our highways each year. Being killed suddenly and violently in combat is not much different than dying in a collision.
I do not accept that it is inevitable that 40,000 people must die on our highways each year. They are killed and injured without much more than local notice. The carnage exists because we, as a society, are not providing the right carrots and sticks to control the behavior of drivers.
Drivers make things worse than they need to be in two areas: Some are passively not being personally, protectively cautious enough, while others are being actively reckless. In my hometown this summer, we have had several deaths of motorcycle riders who weren’t wearing helmets.
Helmets protect more than gray matter. Occasionally, we all have moments when our driving sucks. It happens to all of us, some more than others. If I pull in front of a motorcycle and cause an accident, a helmeted rider might be able to get up and tell me to be more careful. But without helmets, minor mistakes become major. Riders say it is their right to risk their lives, but they also risk my well-being if I am momentarily inattentive.
Not being cautious enough with the use of helmets and seatbelts makes collisions more dangerous and are passive mistakes. More troubling are reckless drivers.
Being inattentive while driving or being incredibly Darwin Stupid are active problems. For example, in an article published this week, Albuquerque Journal staff writer Erica Cordova wrote about two drivers who tried to pass state police cars during a chase.
We all believe we are above-average drivers, but we are not. Some drivers text message, apply makeup or read newspapers. They know it is wrong, but our current system of carrots and sticks does not force them to change their bad behaviors.
The tactics authorities currently use to get drivers to do the right things are obviously ineffective, or we would not have so many deaths. Behaviorists believe that both incentives (carrots) and disincentives (sticks) can provide needed changes in driving behaviors – if we use the right carrots and sticks.
Reward the good and punish the bad
Some drivers cause many collisions and are ticketed often. Others have never had an accident or ticket. Can we effectively reward the good drivers and punish the bad so that we see a discernable change in safety outcomes?
What do good drivers get other than arriving at destinations without injury? Maybe a small discount on their insurance. Does it change anyone’s reckless driving? No, plus, insurance is pooled risk so, ultimately, the good drivers pay for the bad.
There could be carrots such as special lines at the Motor Vehicle Department for identified good drivers. Perhaps tax incentives would help. Or, seized cars could be raffled to the pool of identified good drivers.
Above all else, we must make being a good driver something for which all drivers strive and being a bad driver something to be avoided. That is the only way to make our roads safer.
I am not saying I know what these carrots and sticks should be, I am saying we need to have a national dialogue and find carrots and sticks that work.
Currently, this society struggles to even take the privilege of driving away from repeat drunken-driving offenders. Are we going to get some backbone and take a significant number of bad drivers off of the roads forever? Some say these miscreants will drive anyway. With these people endangering our lives, how tough can we get? Hopefully, tough enough to make a difference.
The problem with the current system is that the money from ticket fines is put in budgets where it is expected the next year. Red light cameras, speed vans and all the other enforcement cannot work if the government counts on the money, because it makes it more difficult to change the system.
There is an old story about a man who went to a psychologist and said, “For the last two years my brother has thought he is a chicken.” The psychologist asked, “Two years? Why didn’t you bring him in sooner?” The man replied, “We needed the eggs.”
While the first offense could still cost money, the second offense should cost time and inconvenience. Perhaps offenders should spend a day picking up trash.
Some think the penalty would be too hard to administer. It would if people react to spending a day at hard labor the same way they just whip their Visa Card to pay tickets. This is about using the right stick so they do not offend in the first place.
We must find the right combination of carrots and sticks to save thousands of lives and then use them.
Swickard is a weekly columnist for this site. You can reach him at michael@swickard.com.