Evening star., 1928-11-26
The Safety Responsibility Law.

Both proponents and opponents of
compulsory automobile insurance will
doubtless be gratif1ed with the safety
responsibility law, the principles of
which have just been announced by the
American Automobile Association after
close study of the entire question of
motorists liability on the highways by a
specially selected committee of traffic
experts from all sections of the country.
Logically the leader in legislative pro-
posals for the benefit of motoring, the
association, realizing the universal de-
mand for law which will remove the
reckless and insolvent driver from the
streets Of every community, has with
the introduction of this measure taken
its rightful place in command of the
forces to promote safety and RESPONSE
bility throughout the United States.
The proposal of the association, which
Is expected to serve as a model for
legislation on this important question
In every State of the Union and the
District Of Columbia, comprises four
basic principles-universal adoption of
drivers license law, suspension of per-
nit of persons found guilty of major
traffic offenses until they have proved
financial liability, suspension of the
driving permits of persons against whom
judgments have been levied for automo-
bile accidents until the judgments are
1iquidated, and proviso in the drivers
license law Of all States which will for
bid the issuance of permit to any per-
son whose privilege to drive is suspend
ed in any other State for failure to re-
spond to damages or because of serious
violations of motor vehicle laws.
Thus the association would first put
into effect drivers license law in the
thirty States which are at present with
out this weapon for the control of the
motor car operator; second, would allow
no motorist the privilege to drive, after
he had shown reckleSsness. unless he
could furnish proof of financial re-
sponsibility; third, would do away for
all time with the motorist who carries
his property or other assets in his wife's
name to avoid payments of judgments
or the motorist who is financially In
capable of liquidating judgments. be-
cause neither of these two classes could
again operate automobiles until they
had settled in full for their indebted
ness, and fourth, would make it impos-
sible for Inotorist to drive again in
any State while he was under ban IN
his home State.
One of the main arguments against
the Massachusetts compulsory insurance
law was that 1t penalised the great body
Of careful motorists for the sins of the
reckless and the insolvent. The pro-
posal of the American Automobile As
sociation does away with this objection.
It puts the issue squarely up to the in
dividual driver. In the eighteen States
and the District of Columbia which now
have a permit law the drivers license
is summarily revoked following convic-
ton of driving while intoxicated, reck-
less driving or other major offenses.
Under the A. A. A. proposal there would
be no change in this provision except
that the reckless operator would not be
able to regain his permit until he had
demonstrated ability to pay for damages
that he might cause. The Judgment
proof motorist has long been one of the
terrors of the road He is responsible to
no one and cannot be reached through
due processes Of law. The doom Of this
class of driver is spelled by the terms of
the proposed measure. If a court of
competent Jurisdiction levies a judg-
ment against him he cannot drive a
car until the judgment is liquidated.
This clause will not only prevent trans
fer Of assets, but will remove from the
streets those who from an economical
standpoint are UNIT to operate a.poten-
TALLY dangerous vehicle inasmuch as
they are without means to compensate
for damages they may cause by their
own recklesSness.
The safety-responsibility law is we'll
rounded legislative proposal. 1t should
be considered as a great stride forward
In the promotion of safety throughout
the United States