California ranked No. 4 on traffic laws
51 Comments Published by clay February 19th, 2008 in State and Local Politics.
Even though California traffic laws are effective, the increased traffic in state creates much frustration. What traffic laws do you think we should add or delete to improve the flow of traffic? When it comes to traffic, California has the worst in the country. But when it comes to traffic laws, California has among the most effective in the nation. A report released Monday by Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety ranks California fourth best in the nation based on 15 laws that it says enhance road safety. California was praised for requiring helmets for motorcyclists, allowing police to pull over people just because they aren’t wearing seat belts, tough drunken-driving laws and restrictions on new drivers younger than 18. However, California was dinged for allowing teens to be on the road until 11 p.m. (the group favors 10 p.m.), not requiring special breath-testing ignition devices for drunk-driving offenders and failing to require kids to be in booster seats until age 8. “This age, often labeled as the ‘forgotten child,’ is too big for child safety seats yet too small to fully benefit from safety belts, which are designed for adults,” said Sean Comey of the state auto club. One possible new law will be the subject of a hearing today. A bill by State Sen. Tom Torlakson, D-Concord, would raise more than $2 million annually to expand driver’s education in public schools. Teens make up less than 6 percent of California’s drivers, but they accounted for 21 percent of traffic deaths from 2002 to 2004.
Driving laws in America are on the State level, rather than the federal level, meaning that state by state, the laws differ. I am happy to know that California ranks among the top in the nation for most effective driving laws.
In response to the question, I want to commend some laws that I believe have drastically helped California become one of the most effective states in regulating traffic around the state. First, the recent changes related to new drivers, such as the eleven o’clock rules for drivers within the first year of driving. Also, not allowing passengers under the age of 25 during that first year has decreased the amount of teen deaths related to driving dramatically.
The previous law had been that new drivers couldn’t drive between the hours of midnight and 5 AM and was changed to 11 PM and 5 AM for the first year. Also, drivers couldn’t drive with somebody under 25 for the first six months and this was changed to the first full year. These changes have decreased accidents involving drivers between the ages of 16-20 by 18% and decreased fatalities by 25%.
Along with these, California’s strict drunk-driving policies and saftey-belt regulations, the Click-it or Ticket campaign for example, add to the saftey provided on California’s roads.
One law that I do not believe is effective, and is somewhat contradictory, is the law saying that after a year of driving, drivers can legally be out on the road after 11 PM, where at least in Los Angeles county, the legal curfew for teens under 18 years old is 11. I wonder how these conflicting laws are supposed to be interpreted by State legislatures. These two laws are contradictory and one of them should be eliminated.
The succesful laws far outway the ones in question, so I strongly believe California deserves to be rated one of the States with the most effective traffic laws.
I think its interesting that of all California Drivers, the 6% consisted of teenagers have a huge fatality rate. Its obvious of course why it would be so, but with all these effective regulations I wonder who abides by them the most. It also makes sense why California would be noted as one of the worst traffic environments as well, I figure New York is up there too.
Aside from the point, I think hearing test, safety belt enforcement, Drivers-Ed in schools seem prominent.
The point is to lower fatality rates in general, and helping out where its most needed. I think linking Public School with Drivers-Ed could help. It use to be that way, and its a hell of a better way to provide it.
Traffic in the California has been a problem to drivers for a long time now. We have some of the busiest highways and streets running all the way to Los Angeles. As mentioned in the passage it says that only 6% of teens account for drivers these days. So if this is true then we don’t really have a problem with our traffic laws. Yes teens might be the higher percentage rate of traffic deaths but compared to other states its not much different. We shouldn’t change any of the traffic laws because then we would be changing the way how the traffic system is worked. Instead maybe by adding new traffic laws for all drivers not just for teens may help with our system. There are so many laws that have worked so far such as no drinking if driving, teens have to drive no later than 11pm, and wearing seat belts. All of those laws are the laws that have kept drivers safe and California settling in a better position when it comes to drivers and the traffic laws.
The traffic laws here in California seem fantastic. I think they deserve a lot of praise like the article says. Although I guess, improvements could be made to make our laws more beneficial. I guess 10 o’clock does seem like a safer time to be home. And I definitely am for the use of booster seats, before 8 years old. I totally agree when Sean Comey says.”they are too small to fully benefit from safety belts”.
I hope the hearing brings change to the chilling statistic at the end of the article. Something surely should be done about it, so it changes.
To be honest I think that it should be up to the parents on whether they should be home at a certain time. Although I do not drive I still have a curfue and that is depended on what time my parents want me home not on what the government to decide nor the “law.” If the parents are strict it will be hella early but if the parents trust their children then they will have the freedom to come home late. To be honest many people say 11pm is early but in reality its not. Especially for a school night what kind of parent would let their child stay out till 11pm on a scool night that is rediculous. On the other hand that law should not apply for a weekend. Weekends are for us to enjoy to get ride of the stress from school. In a way a weekend is a get away for us. Although we all know that the law doesn’t work like that it is not flexible 5hey give you time and you better follow it. As for the traffic…it is not only young teens that are creating traffic in california. The government has to give us young teens a break we are trying to b3ecome a adult by trying to take on responsibility and trying not to depend on our parents so much. That is rediculous tht it will be more likely for teens to get pulled over then older adults. Statistics show that it is more likely for an adult to gt in a accident rather then a teen because the teens are more causous are how they are driving and are the ones trying to avoid accidents. So there for it should be that both young adults and young teens should be pulled over if they are attempting to cause an accident or suspicious of an actual felon.
Some other states may think that californias traffic laws are a bit on the relaxed side, but the reality is, that theyre actually some of the most effective. I have no dissagreements when it comes to the standards that california has set for itself. The laws are simply put there for the saftey of all drivers on the road. The rules are apllied differently depending on your age, but in the long run, they help new drivers develop good driving habits at an early stage. The laws have nothing to do with the roads being overcrowded, they just make them a little safer. Which makes me think that maybe thats why other states doubt california when it comes to driving saftey. Simply the fact that we have some of the worst traffic, doesnt allow other states to follow our lead and accept the fact that we have exceptional traffic laws and safer drivers.
I think the traffic laws should stay the same. I even think they should still keep the time allowing them to drive until 11 p.m.
I don’t know if all the schools have drivers ed or not. Maybe it should be a mandatory class, that way students have drivers education at the palm of their hands without having to go find some place that offers pricey classes.
They way students have some kind of education on driving, no matter what, and it’ll benefit them either way.
The traffic laws that exist in America all vary within states. I think we can all agree that California has the most strict laws regardig traffic. One of the most effective law regarding teenagers I think would be the probation law prohibiting teens from driving after 11pm and between 5am. This law is a nation wide arrangement and serves as a great way to reduce accidents at late hours which is when they mostly occure during a massive traffic span. I believe that there are many problems regarding traffic in California for example many people are usually speeding on the freeway to arrive at places faster. Besides the Drivers ed classes for teens arent really effective I know alot of people that have gone and have not learned anything before getting their permits. Also drunk driving is a big issue in California since we ahve the most entertainment in the country. I propose that we keep the laws that we already have because they have helped fatality rates lower and search implement laws that relate not only to teenagers but also to adults that have drinking problems and responsibilities.
I think that this article voices a very good topic. But there was something that I became iffy and confused about when I cae across it. It stated that California has the worst traffic in the country, but has the most effective traffic laws in the nation. In my opinion, traffic nd the laws pertaining to traffic should coincide. It is weird that we are at both good and bad ends of the same subject. As for the flow of traffic, I think there should be a law on the hours of construction or renovation that takes place on the streets/freeways. Like yesterday for example. Marisol and I were picking up the pizzas at Little Caeasrs, but on our way back to I-Poly we were stuck in 20 minutes of traffic on temple!!… So a car ride that should have taken 5 minutes max, ended up taking 20 minutes. And all this was due to construction. I understand that streets and pavements and etcetra need to be well kept and maintained for us drivers, but can’t they do at another time?… There should be a law that limits or even restricts the operation of construction during school hours, and especially near large universities or colleges. As for the whole lowering the curfew for minor drivers, I honestly don’t think that it would be that effective. Plus what’s one hour difference going to do?… Kids these days will get away with anything, including driving without a license. So driving past curfew isn’t even an obstacle to them.
Driving in california is pretty complex and staright forward. Traffic in california is a something that can not be avoid everyone has somewhere to go and responsibilities to fulfill. The laws wont really make a diffrence as long as traffic goes. I do agree that the laws make the roads alot more safer for any driver. The traffic laws now are pretty descent. I think people abuse to much of the laws. Not everyone goes the speed limit every now and then you see someone not wear a seatbelt, and if they experience an accident they blame it on the car companies claiming that the cars werent “safe” enough. California is an over corwded state due to all the jobs it has to offer. But in reality the laws have nothing to do with how much traffic is regualted in our highways and streets today. The world is becoming overpopulated as time progresses people are having more and more babies. Babies create alot of traffic we all have to drive someday its an everyday neccesettie.
When my parents were in school, they had a Driving Ed. class, and it was free. I’m not sure if it covered behind-the-wheel, but it covered the knowledge of road safety, laws, etc. I think that should be reinstated; I believe it really is an important piece of obtaining a license.
I was surprised to hear that there wasn’t a law for having a booster seat on children. I thought there was a law that required a booster until a certain height. That is really dangerous, with no booster seat; what’s the point of air bags if they just suffocate the victim because the height placement was incorrect?
Another thing: no mention of cell phones? That’s like a law that is probably broken the most. I believe, since 2008, drivers cannot use a hand-held phone while driving? My sister breaks that rule all the time… she even texts while driving…
YAY!!…California is one of the nations top states with the most effective traffic laws although we do have bad traffic, most leading to LA.
..In my opinion i believe that keeping the same laws and enforcing high shcools to have driving classes which will teach things such as safety laws, drinking and driving and other laws needed to know to avoid horrible accidents is a must. yes, we do get this benefit when taking our drivers education and behind-the-wheel but most students wait till there 18 meaning that theres no restrictions on whether they recieved that knowledge since it is expensive. By having it taught at skools everyone will recieve it for free and will have to learn the consequences of driving wrong and the laws that need to be obeyed. Today many young teens are driving and taking advantage of traffic laws so i honestly dont think by enforcing new laws will it ensure safer driving. this really falls on parents that need to enforce curfews to their children if they drive. trust me..teenagers can get away with many things so i wouldnt count on changing an hours difference on curfew. how will you know that the driver is under age or not?? keep the laws the same as it is we already have effective traffic laws.
I dont think any of our driving laws should be changed.
They are fair and effective. Allowing teens the curfue of 11 gives them more leway. Depending on what you are doing or how far you are it would be very difficult to be home by 10.
Last summer i worked at the hollywood bowl. It was almost always impossible for me to make it home by 10. Would there really be a significant difference in accidents it the time was changed to 10? I doubt it.
Required helmits for motercycles is smart. Its an easy way to stay safe. Besides they look cool. Same goes for seat belts. Its not hastle to put them on and they are life savers.
There is so much traffic in california that is cant be all fixed at once but these laws and helping. I would not change or get rid of any of them.
I personally thought that the restrictions on younger drivers were too strict, but seeing the statistics this article provides really makes me take a second glance. I like the idea of being able to provide driver’s education in school because I think that many students choose not to get their licenses before they’re 18 because they’re forced to find a place that offers driver’s education/training. I think that if we can offer this education in schools then teens will be less likely to try and get around the law.
I think that the traffic laws here are appropriate, but even changing, adding, or ridding of any traffic law will not help our traffic problems. I think that the real problem is the simple fact that there are just too many cars on the road. Although our laws have the best intentions of keeping California drivers safe, there will always be those people that will break these laws. One law that really stands out to me is the carpool lane limits (a vehicle must have 2 or 3 passengers). I know that the laws are enforced as best as possible, but its really annoying when you have enough people to carpool and you get stuck behind someone with only one person in the car- it defeats the purpose of a carpool lane.
what the article says is very true. California does have one of the safest yet strictest auto road rules in the country.
The laws inplace right now are fine. The teenage drivers have always been a big chunk of the deaths caused in accedents. Changing the law wil not change this. The curfue is set at 11:00 om at night. making the it a hour earlyer will not do anything.
To show how strict california is with automobiles, my examples is that i was driving to san diego and i got a ticket not from a cop not from a camera but from space. A satalitte took the picture of me speding and geve me a ticket. If that isn’t strict i dont knoe what is.
A thought that should stay in the back of your mind while you reading this blog is look at California, we are know for over crowding and so much population, therefore traffic of course is going to be crazy. Even the article states that California has the worst traffic. That’s why California was ranked fourth on traffic laws instead of any higher. Our laws, although sometimes seem unfair, keep us in schedule with today. I understand that new drivers should be cautious of the law but it seems that officers target teenagers just because their teenagers. Yes it is required to wear a helmet when driving a motorcycle and yes it is mandated for you to wear a seatbelt when driving, but these laws were made for the own good of the driver and should be seen like that. Why would you be against the law whose only purpose is to look out for your best interest? These rules to protect you from danger and not following them will eventually get hurt. A law that should be taken into consideration when talking about deleting is the carpool lane law. This will allow one more lane available for people to drive in and may minimize the overcrowding of traffic. There should be a law that should make you take a driving test every 5 or 10 years to guarantee that you are ware of new laws and also the consisting laws.
traffic is always going to be there adding more law to make traffic less how is that suppose to help? i guess the only thing its helping is for people to get more tickets not to improve traffic no one can stop it! people have places to go people to meet and that equals traffic not the laws. i think as of now the laws are great the seat belt law the booster chair and the teen not able to drive after 11, but changing it to 10 thats unfair what is an hour going to do? i think its hard for people to sometimes get were then need to gt at 10 what about kids who work far from home and get out of work at 9:30 just cause they cant make it does that mean that they get a ticket the laws that we have now are doing what they have to do. i suggest to no changes leave things how they are
Even though the state’s traffic does create frustration, I don’t believe it’s all due to traffic laws. In fact, I think California’s traffic laws are way more effective and safer than laws in other states. It is reasonable for some people to want to add more traffic laws for teen drivers who believe teens are reckless and a hazard on the road. For example, like restricting the use of cell phones, curfew, or even increasing the age when a teenage driver can get their learner’s permit. And I guess that could work for reducing the number of traffic deaths, but I don’t think that will improve the flow of traffic. The reason there’s so much traffic in California is because most of the traffic consists of drivers who are usually going to work. If they wanted to change something to improve the flow of traffic I think it would have to be the working schedule, like working for only 10 hrs for four days instead of five. But I don’t think even that will work so well…
I think this article is really interesting because it contains a lot of valuable information. That’s so crazy that only 6% are teens. However those are the ones that are registered or that are on the DMV records because i know a lot of people that are under age but then again are driving, they don’t even have a license but are still driving and that is not safe. Hence, they are a danger to society and those teens that drive with out a license are probably what makes the majority of the 21% of the deaths because i see it as they are not well prepared to drive so they don’t know what they are doing. i think that it is really good that the police has the right to pull you over for not wearing the sea belt. I mean all they are trying to do is trying to protect you and trying to safe you from killing yourself. Sometimes i see it as police worship our life more than we do.i think that it s really good that California was ranked one of the top 4 safest place. Now i know that i live in a more secure place to drive in. i also think that it is great that the state of CAlifornia is so strict but then again i don’t. I don’t think is that great because sometimes it feels like they are to over protective and they don’t let us do much. Even though the laws are getting stricter and stricter as the years go by i think its really good because as the years go by they see the new problems that are causing deaths. That is how our new laws take place and that is how our lives last longer.
Out of all the people who have drivers licences, about more then half of them still don’t know how to drive. Shit il admit it i can’t drive, brandon can’t drive and alyssa sure as hell can’t drive. You see the problem is, is that people are freaking stupid. They neglect the laws, hate to wait when traffic is a bitch and love to speed. Most people that need to be wearing their glasses while drivig don’t.
I truthfully am surprised that we are one of the top ons with best traffic laws being that all you hear nowadays is the negative side of it all. I really believe driver’s ed should be offered at school as it was before, because this internet and temporary classes don’t really seem to be doing much in my opinion. Where i went for my classes didnt teach me much. I just went to hurry up and get my written part out the way and bs my test and passed and it wasn’t until i got my permit when i took it serious adn had family members take me out and teach me to really learn the rules of the road. I believe if it was added again as an elective it would help keep the students focused because their grade relies on it and the possibility to drive. Also the class would last for a longer time period to be able to really teach the students all that needs to be considered when driving. I agree with all our laws, but I don’t agree with the idea of trying to keep kids in a booster seat until they are like 8 yrs. I think that is restraining the child from growing mentally. i think the longer in a “carseat” the longer they will think they are a little kid and by that time they are pretty grown and needing to learn or already responsibilities/independence. As for the hour change for the first year underage drivers I really don’t think it matters if it was changed or not because if they want to they are going to no matter what adn it just depends on whether they get caught or not.
so many people live and love california. i think if california raises the driving law to a higher age like 18 or 21, it will not help reduce traffic. if you think about it how are us teenagers going to go to school and work or a girls house? someone thats an adult or out parents are going to have to drive us around and it will take more time for them because they have to drop us off then drive home and then pick us up again when we can just drive our selves and spend the night and then we drive our self home. i think the biggest thing about california is that people need to carpool because everytime i go to school i get bored and just look at other peoples cars and its always one person in it going to work or school while im driving on the freeway. in the morning almost every car i see is a single person in it and they are like driving a big suv that sits 10 people. single drivers are causing more traffic and they are ruining the enviroment. california should make a website for local carpool list and where they go each day like if they go to the same direction each morning and take turns driving each other to school or work or where ever they are going. california need to learn how to communicate and work as a group like ipoly group projects. another law should be they should make the dmv driving test harder where you can miss less. they should add situations and other real life traffic incedents. people should live closer to work or school so they can walk to it instead of pollute and cause traffic on the road. more cars equal more traffic. what if they put cameras on stop sign intersections. if california wants to be even more strict, they should raise the car accident insurance fees to very expensive so that make people think and try their best to not get into one because car accidents cause lots of traffic because people are so interested to what happend so they press the brakes in the middle of the freeway so that they can see the flipped car longer. and i think its really retarded when cop pulls you over for no reason. i should have the right to drive my nissan regularly without getting pulled over and getting harassed by stupid cops telling me bullshit like your muffler is too loud or i saw your seatbelt wasn’t on. i get newer bs excuses to pull me over everytime, next time they are going to get me a ticket because im asian.
I didn’t realize that teens made up such a small percent of drivers but have a relatively high percentage of deaths. This must be why they have so many rules and restrictions on young drivers. I don’t think that the traffic problem has anything to do with California’s traffic laws. It has to do with the amount of cars on the road. There are just too many and that’s what is causing all the traffic. There are a lot of people on California and they need to drive to work, so of course there is going to be traffic problems. I don’t think that there is any way around that. I agree with Shiza, I don’t think that the curfew be changed to 10. I think that California’s traffic laws are fine the way they are. They don’t need to be changed. Its not like changing the laws is going to help with the traffic problem we have.
That’s pretty awesome that California is number 4 on traffic laws. Woot for California!
But adding laws to the ones that we already have? Not so much. They made the laws stricter for teens because of the number of deaths due to drunk driving, and giving teens a specific time to be home at night. I agree with the fact that they are trying to keep teens safe and want to stop drunk driving, but I don’t agree with them telling teens when they should be home. The DMV isn’t our parents, OUR parents should be the ones telling us when we should be home whether it being 10pm or 12midnight we shouldn’t have to be told by the law. I mean if OUR parents didn’t want us to drive then that would be different and the law wouldn’t have worry about what time we arrived home. But I’m sure that most parents want their kids to become independent once they reach the proper age, by allowing them to drive to their destinations.
And I have to agree with the article saying that California has the worst traffic. I mean sitting in your car for about 10 minutes just to get to the next exit is crazy. I remember once I was in the car with my Mom and there was a terrible accident, the cars on the freeway were dead stopped and no car could move, we were there waiting for about 15 minutes trying to figure out how long it was going to be. Don’t get me wrong but they had to clean the scene and get people to the hospital before they started to let the cars pass. That’s more important then causing another accident. But I think the main problem with people in California when they drive is what they call “Rubbernecking”. Slowing down to see what is going on, and taking their sweet time obstructing everyone else, which is really annoying. But needless to say the only way we can stop so much traffic on the freeways and streets is if people learn to drive cautiously and not exceed the speed limit. And to adding more laws to stop that, I honestly don’t think that, that would do any good. And that’s my opinion.
It was stated that it was favored for a child to stay in a booster seat until age 8. But not everyone at age 8 could fit in a booster seat affecting parents who simply can’t do anything about it. I think either bigger booster seats should be made or the requirement should be by weight and not age,
This is a very good argument.California has horrible traffic,and it’s funny that we actually have the best trafic laws.But maybe that is the problem….
I think with the more rules there are,the more rules there are for people to break instead of following.There is always going to be the typical “rush hour” type of traffic.In the morning,lunch time,and in the evening when everybody returns back home.The other type of traffic is when there is an accident and you have everyone and their mother trying to figure out what is going on.
I love the fact about the percentage of teen drivers,because it is absolutely true.Teens are the main people who i think actually try to follow all trafic laws because they are all scared of the police.I know from personal experience that it is almost the worst feeling in the world when you get pulled over by the cops,knowing it’s you and all of your friends on a Saturday night at 10:30pm!
I’m not sure what can be added or changed about any of the California traffic laws,but something needs to happen.I’m pretty sure that adding laws isn’t going to make anything better,because like said before thats more rules that can just be broken.
I’m really surprised to find that California is ranked 4th in traffic law efficiency, only because I thought that a state with so much traffic was bound to be the least safe but I’ve been proven wrong. We may not be as strict as other states in some areas like provisional driving standards (can’t drive past 11pm) or booster seating but what we are doing is really helping make the roads safer for all that drive.
After saying that, I believe there is really not much we can add or subtract from our laws to reduce traffic. I remember having this conversation in Purther’s and the reason he gave as to why a massive public transit system in California would be hard is one I’ve heard before and agree with. On the east coast, the cities were built up so everything is close to each other, but over here, everything was built out so it would be harder to reach all those that need to move in and out of major cities, like Los Angeles, everyday. Because of this I feel like Los Angeles will always be infamous for its traffic like it is for its housing prices, but for me it just adds to the “charm” of Southern California.
California realizes the traffic situation isn’t going to change so they’ve worked with that and is now the 4th in traffic law efficiency, which is great, even though being number one is always better.
I think that the current laws we have now are reasonable. However there is always room for improvement and if by moving the curfew from 11 to 10 will be effective, then so be it. California should continue in perfecting their state laws and if they show effectiveness, other states should do the same. Its better to be safe then sorry. If they were to make any changes to any of the current laws, they should make them clear and well known because, sometimes you don’t even know whats going on anymore.
I also think that the state should crack down on people using cellphones while driving and that includes texting, going on the internet, anything to do with cellphones. Cellphones are a great distraction while being on the road! Especially teens, according to injuryboard.com teens are more likely to be in a car accident since they are inexperienced drivers. An example of an accident that might have been caused because of texting is one that happened on June 28, 2007 in NY. There were 5 young teens that were killed in the crash. Seconds before the crash, the driver had been texting. This has brought police and investigators to the conclusion that the crash was caused because, the driver was too busy texting that they took their eyes off the road. Not only are teens started to become affected by people of all ages that use a cellphone while driving.
In fact, driving while using a cellphone is just as dangerous as driving while being drunk! According to a recent study done by the University of Utah, its been proven! So if California has already enforced laws and cracked down on drivers to not drive while being drunk, they should also do it with cellphones! Their both equally dangerous, why not?
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=3378025
http://greensboro.injuryboard.com/car-accidents/teen-sent-text-message-seconds-before-fatal-crash.php
http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-6090342-7.html
http://www.car-accidents.com/cell_phone_car_accidents.html
Well, I do really understand this article. I can understand that we have one of the best traffic laws their is in the states. Like for example the California right turn thing is pretty good. This state is really trying hard in making the road more enjoyable and safer. Reason we have so much god-damn traffic is cause we have a lot of people. A lot of okay drivers and a lot of shitty ass drivers. I don’t believe their is a really good driver. My dad would be considered a professional I suppose cause he works for MTA, but still their is no godly driver. I like that California is trying to invest in more classes because seriously some people on the streets are really rude. We just need to improve in working with those crappy ass drivers and being more strict. If teens are one of the biggest benefactors to accidents, I guess we have to be taught better. Also treated as individuals cause some teens can drive and others can’t. I don’t think current laws should be changed, just improved upon, and the creation of better laws. Also we have to deal with the shitty ass drivers god-damn it annoys me. Umm well I suppose thats it, what Stephen said was funny haha.
I think this is a very important article that a lot of people should read, especially people that are not from California. Wow im suprised that California was ranked 4th best that really good. It figures because California is very overprotective sometimes it seems like a little to much it feels like you cant even go out and breath. However, i know that they are doing this for our own good. I like some of the laws they made. Like for example if you drink dotn drive because not only might yuou kill yourself but also people around you. Tahts good they made that law because it avoids a lot of deaths. EVen though sometimes people tend not to lisent but still its worth making it a law. Im really glad that i live in a top 4 place to live and drive it makes me feel more secure.
I think the state traffic laws should stay as is. Why? Simply because it’s working for us. As stated, “A report released Monday by Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety ranks California FOURTH best in the nation based on 15 laws that it says enhance road safety.” Which means our state must be doing something right. As for the comment about traffic and that California has it the worst, you can’t really do anything about it. A new law can’t even change that. For example, you can’t say, “you can only drive at this certain time and you, you have to drive at this certain time.” Especially since we live in Southern California where LA is, traffic is expected, especially when people are trying to get home from work.
As for the comment about California being to lenient to teens by allowing them to be on the road till 11 PM instead of 10 PM, I don’t think it really matters. What’s one hour going to do? Anyways, if it were set at 10 PM, the law would just be broken anyways. And about failing to require kids to be in booster seats till age 8? Hmm…I don’t see why California is being dinged for that. I think at age 8, you’re too big for a booster seat anyways. Plus to me you can’t really set an age rate for the requirement of a booster seat? Why? Because children grow at different paces. Like, let’s say an 8 year old is like bigger than the average 8 year old, you can’t make him or her sit in a booster seat, because it won’t be needed.
i believe that californias driving and highway standards are one of the best (meaning strictest) in the country and this proves it, we are within the top 5 states. so i think that we are in a good place in this ranking, i dont know who is the strictest state but im sure that they still get te high fatality rate of teen drivers. i dont drive but i know how hard it might be when youre driving, especially when your driving with your friends. because they sometimes can make you do things that you might not wanna do when theyre not there. californias standards are the highest in everything that i know of, things that are strict in some other states are maybe even stricter in this state.
now that i hae lost myself from the original question ill answer it. i dont think that california has to add and/or delete any current laws, i think that our problem is our current population. its also probably because of the lifestyles that most people have adopted, we all live far away from our jobs. yes some of its forced because there are more jobs then places for people to live in the city. also the fact that some people cant afford to live closer to their jobs that they have to move as far away as they need to in order to live an affordable lifestyle. our traffic has no problem with the laws its with both the people and how they drive, along with were they live and work, sometimes.
I’m shocked to hear that California has one of the best traffic laws. I think we have really bad drivers on the road. But I guess we do have a lot of laws that should help to prevent accidents. It is a good idea to add more to drivers education, because i know that helps people especially teens. I learned firsthand that it’s easier to learn from someone who knows the EXACT rules compared to learning from a loved one. I highly doubt every driver reads the entire driving rules booklet; therefore, if the majority of first time drivers take these classes, it would reduce accidents. I never realized how much more teens cause accidents. However it’s only because all teens are new drivers. The other drivers are mostly experienced drivers; therefore, obviously they don’t make up such a high accident rate. The driving rules could be so “strict” because we have so many cars on the road. With more cars on the road, it equals to more chances of accidents.
Well I do agree with the fact that California has horrible traffic problems, and that there are laws that could help in this crisis but you have to keep in mind that there are some laws that people just dont follow. One being the drive time curfew for teenagers under the age of 18, I dont know of one teenager that actually worries about getting off the road by eleven. Its sad to get caught because everyone does it. There are some laws that are really lame and wont do anything but make more traffic. An example of this is the one they want to pass where they want to put toll boxes on the freeways and charge people to drive on the freeway. That is ridiculous, gas prices are already at extremely high rates no one wants to pay to drive on a freeway that they have to drive on every single day on the way to school or work. Plus even if money comes from there to repair the roads, having to stop and make line to pay at the toll boxes is only going to create more traffic. So my point is its retarded. Oh and I also think that Ipoly should offer drivers ed like normal highschools eventhough Ipoly is nothing close to a normal highschool. Maybe offer it as an elective or make it something mandatory like the sophomores film studies class on fridays.
I am actually surprise when i read this because i think it is really true. When its late at night usually there are some check points at major streets to check for and drunk drivers. California is really strict on their traffic laws and they are really enforcing it well. Getting the drivers training in school is also a good idea. If you go to a private class for drivers training it is usually really expensive like 100-300 dollars. But if schools make it as one of their classes in high school it would make many people save a lot of money. Even though in this blog it mentions that there are still problems within the system, but it some of those problems really will not restrain many people. The thought of having a kid in a booster seat until they reach 8 is kinda a pain for the child. And that they are thinking of changing they time limit from 11pm to 10pm will really make no difference because teens are really rebellious and they would break the law. But over all California’s traffic laws will benefit people and will be the best in the future.
I think that California does a terrific job with the traffic laws..and that the increased traffic is simply caused by the amount of people living in California. There really isnt anything California should be doing any differently, and the only flaws that the article brought up are up for interpretation. California is a very liberal state in general so making the driving curfew 11pm fits the persona of the state and the population of this state. Not requiring special breath tests for drunk drivers isnt that important because more often than not the traditional methods work well and there’e no use in spending money and extra uneeded equipment. California is doing everything right, and has done really everything it can. Hopefully teenage drivers can learn to drive safer, because if things get much worse the state may be forced to make everyone wait until the age of 18 to drive legally.
There are so many traffic laws in California and it seems that there are only a few. In my opinion California is doing a good job witht the traffic laws but also enforcing the as well. I think the most effecive traffic laws are the ones permitting teens for drivig late at night and with anyone under the age of 25, and also the law with children having to be in a car seat or a booster seat until they reach a certain age or weight. However there are some laws that i think are kind of weird but may not have to do with the traffic laws. All in all i think the traffic laws are pretty good and do there job of keep drivers safe and others safe. Thats what i think about the current traffic law. Hopefully drivers and especially teen drivers realize that they are not experienced drivers and the rules are enfored to keep them safe. So all teens drive safe and follow the rules. They are pu in place for a reason.
the traffic in california sucks. there’s so much of it sometimes that it’s not even bareable. especially if you drive with someone who gets road rage easily. a lot of times the traffic seems to just come out of no where. the other day i wa going home from b.p and there was tons of traffic. as i started driving through it, it all cleared up, and that was it, no accident, no stalled car, nothing. i hate when that happens. i’m sure the traffic is even worse than that of what’s on the 10, but i don’t like freeways, so i don’t usually go on them (people are assholes on freeways). and there is a lot of crazy drivers on the freeway too, which is probably what contributes to the fatalities and accidents.
personally, i think the new laws they want to add are fine. even though that 8 year old thing was kind of weird, it is true that seatbelts are made for “adults” so i think it would help whenever there is an accident.
..that’s about it
Many people might be too cautious about what they are doing, and could cause an accident. Or maybe the people who don’t care about the laws like speeders might have freedom to do anything so it’s pretty lame to have so many traffic laws.
Traffic in California is a problem. For example, it might be the cause of why you are late to either school or work every now and then. Even though California has one of the highest numbers in its traffic, it has one of the best laws in the nation. I believe that it’s a good thing that children are required to sit in a carseat rather than just have a seat belt on. It’s safer, since seat belts were made for adults and such. If involved in an accident, the child might get hurt if they’re just wearing a seat belt. Then, the curfew of 11 pm seems just right. It shouldn’t be changed, it’s a good time.
I don’t know if they do this anywhere in the US yet, but I’ve always thought that the way Mexico City deals with traffic is great. Mexico City’s traffic is INSANE. LA traffic has NOTHING on Mexico City’s… you’re like seriously risking your life any time you even GET into your car. It’s crazy really. But what has been done there is that every day of the week, there is a designated number for the day of the week, and if your license plate number ends in the number that is chosen for that day, you cannot drive your car. For instance, if tomorrow’s number is a 7, and your license plate is like 4MCY207 or something, you can’t drive it tomorrow. This greatly reduces the amount of cars that are on the road there. Although the traffic is still crazy there, I’m sure that if this law wasn’t put, it would be way worse. I’ve always come to the conclusion that California needs to do something like this. It’s the only thing I see reasonable.
About that whole booster seat thing for kids 8 and under though, wow. I think that was really stupid. WHY would a child at that age (like 7) need a booster seat?! I think if anything that would be more of a danger hazard than safety, so I’m glad California hasn’t adopted a stupid law like that.
Well I don’t understand what our traffic laws have to do with the amount of traffic we have. Requiring helmets doesn’t increase the number of people on the road. So those aren’t strange statements to be next to each other at all. I think that our laws are sufficient, although I didn’t realize that the breathalizer was not required for drunk driving offenders, which would be a positive addition to many cars. But, besides that California has a good hold on trying to keep drivers in line. The problem of traffic is definitely caused by the MASSIVE population we boast. The only way I could imagine the problem being solved is by means of large-scale infrastructure improvement expansion. But, I don’t think the tax payer will be dying to give up half of their earnings any time soon for such a large project as this. And I’m glad. Californian land needs no more tearing up, but Californians need to use their cars less! Yet I know this is easier said than done and I will in no way be staying home from Disneyland to avoid emissions. Point being, people want to drive, they can deal with traffic and the risk.
i can see how they are tying to get driver’s ed avalable to us at school and i think it is good, The only way anyone becomes a good dirver is by experiance. And the rules and laws we have in our state has reduced accedientd and deaths. Esspecially how there is now a lot of advertisement and propaganda consisting with drinving and safety. I wouldn’t change any of the laws right now.
For me i think that it is important that young drivers experiance the road because there is a big difernce in reading about doing something then actuall doing it. So for driving, its taking what you learn and applying and also developing habits, like scanning the road. I think that parents should teach their kids how to drive, like let them drive around in an emty parking lot every once in a while or down a sucluded street, or an open lot of some sort. Not only when they reach the age to drive but even before, let them have a feel on how powerful a car can be.
The only trouble i find with this is that kids might take advantage of knowing how to drive before getting their license or even their permit. Peole will do this anywaise, regardless ,….right, eh.
I believe that these current laws that apply to different agaes is the states way of trying to keep us safe and learn the regulations of the rode like something we will never forget. It good in my book, at least for now. (:
Most of the laws a driver has to follow are for his or her own good. most of these laws are created with logical reasons to back them. Even the ridiculous booster seat law, maybe the average weight of 8 year olds in the united states still puts most passenger children in danger of flying out from under their seatbelts and slamming into a car window. anyways, none of the laws that are in effect irritate me too much, i can understand why most are in effect.
like most evetyone before me already suggested, i think that California should definitely make an effort to emphasize a law that would benefit commuters who are carpooling. I believe that an increase in carpooling or public transportation by commuters would leave less people on the streets resulting in a lower percentage of possible accidents on freeways and streets.
Aside from most of the laws that drivers have to follow, i have never liked the idea of giving a business the power to tow someones car away because they are in wrong parking spot. I think that putting people through that kind of stress is ridiculous. I mean everyone hates getting fines or tickets, that’s good enough of a punishment i think.
The traffic in California is dramatically disgusting. Although the laws get stricter traffic is always going to stay in California. The laws yes to be honest are a good idea. Even though myself being a teen, i should admit that most teens are going to be afraid to break the law about drinking and driving. Although their are those that become a bit rebel and do the opposite of what the state wants. The laws have become strict but overall i think its for the states good and the well being of all the citizens in California. Its a requirement for the government to look out for the well being of it state.
I think that our current law are good enough. I do not think that our traffic laws are the cause of our traffic problems, california is a highly populated state, and have a great number of people commuting to work or home around the same hour.Most major cities do infact have a large amount of traffic, so this problem is not only in our state. I do not think there is much that we are able to do to solve this traffic problem, aside from car pulling or building more roads/ freeways.
I also agree with the state attmepting to instate drivers ed in school. This will allow drivers to become more familiar with driving, rules of the road, and over all become a better driver.
Hmm, this topic is pretty interesting since I myself am a california driver and would be affected by these new laws. Having to be home by 11p.m or not being able to legally drive past that time isn’t all that great. I guess my opinion would be very bias since I personally wouldn’t like to have a earlier time or anything, and also having to get those breathalizer tests. Teens may have a high percentage when it comes to accidents, but what people don’t see is that teenagers are not responsible. They don’t drive like a 30 or 40 year old would, they like the fast life, and showing off. Older people don’t see it that way, they just see it as stupidity, or lack or responsibility. The laws that California has made for traffic here are already in my opinion quite good, heck they’ve got us in 4th place and seem to be getting better.
Wow. That’s a staggering number. Teens make up 6% of California’s drivers, but account for 21% of traffic deaths.
That’s a scary thought, but nonetheless is going to happen. You cant generate experience over-night.
New driving laws?
I like the idea of Ignition-locks for repeat DUI offenders. It’s a good option, and has a lot of backing by car companies.
I’m very much so against the driving curfew. Teens need experience driving at night just as much as driving during the day. When you turn 18, nothing magical happens. You aren’t just zapped full of knowledge. So what’s the difference?
I think california is doing a real good job at keeping the roads safe while having the some of the worst traffic in the country. I think I speak for everyone when I say that being stuck in traffic is the worst thing about driving. Especially that damn 60 freeway… They’ve been doing construction on that thing for so many years and they still can’t finish it! The lanes on it are all fuked up on it too. You have to real careful on it because some of those lanes actually go into eachother! The only thing I would suggest to keep traffic moving is an age limit, and im not talking about being 18 to be able to legally drive. I think we need to ask ourselves how old is too old when it comes to driving. I know it sounds kinda messed up, but old people tend to drive slow, they can’t see as well, and many of them have health issues that makes them dangerous when behind the wheel.
The traffic in california may be one of the worst but the laws really have nothing to do witht the amount of traffic there is in the cities. The laws only have to do with the safety that the drivers should have while on the road. To fix the traffic problem at specific intersections they should use cameras and control when the lights should change i dont know if they do but i think that should help.
California has to have many laws for driving so they can be enforced and warn everyone else to not do those things. We need many laws because we are a huge economy. Although our unemployment rate is high, we have many employed that drive to work. Some have far commutes and some have short ones. Bigger cities such as LA, San Diego, and San Francisco, house huge buildings with thousands of employees working at all hours of the day. With this type of employment come higher incomes that allow many people to travel for vacations. Many people flock to Rio or Las Vegas areas on weekend trips. California never sleeps. There is always traffic on the roads, there will always be. As for congestion, that depends on day of the week and hour. (This is why I’m going into the Traffic field… job demand and stability, plus high pay for low labor.)
Although some may want to see teens not driving so late, it is hard because of how responsible our teens must be. Today teens are involved in many community events, school activities, or taking care of their family. They are driving all the time to fulfill their commitments.
Parents are always working and are therefore unable to be driving their children around. California’s buss system is inadequate. (Due to the fact that cars were more popular before transportation systems were need for a growing population. Back in New York, cities were full grown before the automobile craze. Once automotives were invented they created mass transportation systems. Just because some teens are irresponsible, does not mean all of the other teens making a difference in the world should be held back.
As for our “forgotten children,” it is true. There is only so much you can enforce. It would be near impossible to enforce a law that would require preteen identification, weight scales, and measuring tapes. To make young children who are barley learning to read and add carry legal identification is crazy. Kids need to be able to grow up on there time. Not adult time. Making police take each child out and be weighted and measured for a little ticket is not the most pressing issue that our police should be occupied with. Police ticket parents who children are obviously endangered by not being placed in a car seat. Yes we need to remember our “forgotten children” but lets not make crazy laws that can never be enforce. Lets not waste our time; let’s make a difference with our time. We should still educate all and especially our young about car and traffic safety. Education is the best way to change someone’s action. For example Super Size me changed McDonalds menus because the demand for their food went down. Now they offer salads, apples instead of fries, and milk instead of soda.