| Summary Report | ![]() |
May 1999 |
|
|
IntroductionOn January 22-23, 1999, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) brought together an array of public safety, legal, and adjudication representatives to discuss traffic safety, specifically the problems associated with aggressive driving. Participants included prosecutors, district court judges, law enforcement and emergency personnel, district and states attorneys, criminal defense attorneys, safety advocates and activists, researchers, and government policy and state public safety personnel. The symposium sought to derive action steps toward solving the problem of aggressive driving as approached from six different perspectives: (1) statutory approaches, (2) applied technology, (3) charging decisions, (4) sentencing strategies, (5) community leadership, and (6) enforcement strategies. These six categories served as topic areas for framing participant discussions and resulting recommendations developed in breakout sessions. In addition to breakout sessions, plenary sessions featured remarks by the Secretary of Transportation Rodney Slater, NHTSA Administrator Ricardo Martinez, FHWA Administrator Kenneth Wykle, and a victim of an aggressive driving collision. Paper presenters reported on the results of preconference focus groups and provided background and overview information on the problem of aggressive driving. Panel presentations focused on the issues, research, and approaches of other driving-related organizations. The
Problem
Enforcement
Programs and Laws to Curb Aggressive Driving While California's "Smooth Operator" program, begun in 1988, was probably the first aggressive driving program in the country, Arizona's legislature was the first to pass a law specifically addressing aggressive driving. The bill, enacted May 26, 1998, requires that violators simultaneously commit a speeding offense and at least two reckless driving offenses before they can be charged. Such violations include failing to obey traffic control devices, overtaking and passing another vehicle on the right by driving off the pavement or main travel portion of the roadway, making unsafe lane changes, following too closely, or failing to yield the right-of-way. Virginia passed a law in March 1998 requiring driver education programs offered through the school system to include aggressive driving instruction. In 1998, 9 states introduced a total of 26 aggressive driving bills, only 2 of which--the Arizona aggressive driving bill and the Virginia driver education requirement--were enacted. Four states have bills pending this year. Most of these bills attempt to define aggressive driving offenses and establish penalties for them. Some specify characteristics of aggressive drivers, or give those convicted of the offense certain additional penalties, such as mandatory educational classes or loss of their licenses for repeat offenses--similar to impaired driving sanctions. Other options adopted by state legislators to address aggressive driving include the following: improving funding of prosecutorial efforts, increasing fines and penalties, developing state education programs about aggressive driving, emphasizing seatbelt laws, and legislating traffic camera radar devices. The
Solution NHTSA's aggressive driving work plan includes the development of innovative and effective countermeasures and enforcement strategies. Public information and education (PI&E) is another important component of these efforts, as methods, strategies, and programs are developed to inform the public, law enforcement agencies, engineers, and the judiciary of the potential dangers of aggressive driving and the steps being taken to reduce its occurrence and consequences. NHTSA will also continue to hold meetings and other events, such as the present Aggressive Driving Symposium, to bring together all the stakeholders involved to discuss effective legal and other strategies. |
|