Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-01-26
SAFETY LAW PROMISES
CURB ON TRAFFIC EVILS
Reckless and irresponsible Drivers Elk
pected to Be Eliminated by Re-
sponsibility Legislation.

With the safety-responSibility law nov
in effect in whole or in part in 1:
States, including New York, it is in
evitable that the effect of the new
motor legislation on the reduction o.
accidents, on the control of the reck.
less and irresponsible driver and on ths
adjustment of compensation for dam.
ages, will be watched with the keenest
interest and subjected to the mos
critical analysis. 1t is well that thi.
should be so.
The friends of safety-responsibility
have been careful not to advocate the
legislation as a cure-all for every traffic
| Ill. 1t was put forward as promising
the maximum benefits along sane and
practical lines. The legislation has not
been in effect long enough to permit
OF the volume of experience necessary
to form conclusive judgment.
However, If given a fair trial and
| developed as experience indicates, the
underlying principles of the legislation
| will in due course place moral response
bility at the wheel of the automobile
II we can but make moral responsibility
| compulsory everywhere and at all times
we have all but solved our problem
And every indication today would seem
! to promise that the cumulative effect
| OF the safety-reSponsibility legislation
| will be to render moral responsibility
81, compulsory.
Interest in New York Law.
BY reason of its comprehensive char
| acter, the New York safety-reSponsi-
bility law will come in for particular
attention. This is, however, one of the
| States where the law has not been in
effect long enough to admit of far
reaching conclusions as to its beneficial
results. But it is significant to note
that Connecticut, where conditions are
very similar to those in New York and
which has been pioneer in the safety
! responsibility movement. with its expert
ence dating considerably further back
than that of the Empire State, is now
considering the further strengthening
OF its legislation.
Said Motor Vehicle Commissioner
Robbins B. Stoeckel recently:
This law provides an effective Weap-
on for the motor vehicle department
to use against offenders. 1t is really an
aid to the suspension powers. I'm
QueStionably the next session of the
legislature will broaden the scope of
this law. Its moral effect on those to
whom it Is applied is bound to be good.
The experience of an undesirable going
from one insurance company to another
trying to find some one who will guar
NACSO AAn1A Al L4Ac l1SLIt u d DtAQ record
Is bound to be educational to him, to
say the least"
When the proper time comes, am
confident that Gov. Roosevelt will find
himself In accord with Gov. Young OF
California, who recently had this to say
in regard to the financial responsibility
provision Of the California motor vehicle
code:
Accidents to Decrease.
"As soon as the public becomes more
familiar with the full meaning of the
law, we will see a material decrease in
accidents on the highway"
In whole or in part, the law is now
in effect in the FLOWING IL States:
New York, Rhode Island, Connecticut
California, Iowa, Maine, North Dakota,
Wisconsin, Vermont, New Jersey, New
Hampshire and Minnesota. Not one of
these States has taken a backward
glance, while several Of them are con-
provisions of the law or the strengthen
ing Of provisions already in effect
BY way of contrast It should not be
overlooked that Massachusetts,, after
several years Of experience with COM
pulSory automobile insurance, has now
committee investigating the entire
structure of the legislation, while no
other State has so far followed MasSa-
chusetts' lead.
In spite of the public support ac-
corded the Safety-reSponSibility law, as
evidenced by the action of these IL
States, some criticism has been leveled
against it. This was to be expected.
The criticism falls into two categories
First, 1t represents the viewpoint Of
special interests whose business they
feel might be adversely affected; who
have consistently opposed all forms Of
responsibility" and who, as far as is
known, have never brought forward a
constructive alternative. Second, it
comes from sources whose object it is
either to miSrepreSent the legislation
and its aim, or who have not taken the
trouble to distinguish between what it
provides for and what It does not
What exactly does Safety-responsi-
bility mean? The most comprehensive
statement of the principle Is set forth
in the A. A. A. model law on which
the New York law was almost entirely
based. It embodieS four basic provi-
sions, as follows:
Universal Drivers Law.
First, a universal drivers license law;
and in this day and age 1t Is difdcult
to believe that this demand will meet
with any sound opposition.
second, mandaCOry suspension OF
the driving privileges Of all persons con-
victed of serious violations Of the motor
vehicle laws until proof Of future finan-
cial responsibility has been established.
This is in addition to penalties under
the State motor vehicle code.
Third, 1t provides for the suspension
Of the driving privileges of all persons
against whom a final Judgment estab-
fishing the drivers negligence has been
| legally rendered and who have failed to
meet the Judgment this suspension to
| remain in effect until the Judgment
has been satisfied and a guarantee of
future responsibility q tablished
Fourth, It provides for the insertion
In the drivers license law of every
State q proviso which will prevent the
issuance of q permit to any person
whose right to drive is at that time
suspended In any other State, thus in
effect providing for the inter-exchange
of suspension rulings as between the
States and rendering the disability ma
| tionally reciprocal.
One OF the commoneSt arguments adj
vanced against the legislation is that
1t does not make the financial RESPONSE
| bility operative at all until a man or a
woman has had an accident. glance
at provision two. above stated, will
| show that this is not the case. In
fact, a person never need have had an
4 81 A.. ~