The people's voice. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1939-1969, 1961-12-01

program are 10 Dc IildlilCdlfleu, NOW
ever, there must be a continuing
application of high standards and
good sense in the day-to-day traffic
situation. There must be strict en-
forcement of sensible laws.
DRIVERS ARE ALSO VOTERS
Politics, in one form or another, is
the traditional stumbling block in the
way of strict enforcement. When
there is a call for harsher driver IL
censing procedures, for example, leg
islators are quick to remember that
the motorist is also a voter. The
Rhode Island General Assembly re-
Gently passed an act giving the regis
trar of motor vehicles new authority.
If a traffic violator has his license
revoked, and if he must drive to earn
his living, then the registrar may give
him special license. Comparable
pressures are brought to bear at the
police and court levels when demands
arise for strict and impartial enforce
ment
Of course, virtually every state and
community at some time or other ex-
periences a period of strict law en-
forecement. But all too often the
period is short one. Studies have
shown that though motorists say that
they feel it is just as wrong to break
traffic law as to steal, the majority
of them want warnings handed out
instead of tickets. With such evidence
at their fingertips, the politicians do
indeed seem to speak for the people
and the enforcement officials
listen.
Yet there is opposing evidence as
well. 1t comes most notably from
Connecticut, where the then Governor
Abraham Ribicoff decreed several
years ago that speeders would lose
their licenses for 80 days after a
single conviction. Later he provided
even harshed penalties for reckless
driving. The highway death toll
showed a dramatic decrease. And
Ribicoff was reelected by a hand
some margin, despite his action, which
had been called political suicide.
ENFORCEMENT is ONLY
PART OF PROGRAM
Law enforcement is a vital aspect
of the traffic safety picture, but it
can be no better than the laws and
safety regulations themselves. The
need is not for more laws so much
as better ones.
The prime example of a weak
ness in the traffic laws and regula-
tions is the unrealisticaIly low
speed limit. Even the police tacitly
acknowledge the widespread ma
ture of this situation by allowing
drivers a five-to- O. mile-an-hour
tolerance.
Everyone agrees that speed kills,
but there is sharp disagreement as
to how this statement is to be inter-
preted. The weight of the evidence is
that speed too fast for conditions
rather than speed per se-is the cause
of most road mishaps. The New Jer-
sey Turnpike Authority has set
legal speed limit of 60 miles an hour
under normal conditions. When fog
or ice or other adverse elements make
such speed unsafe, the limit is
lowered to 35. Almost without ex-
ception, it has been found, motorists
obey the lower limit. 1t is reasonable,
and they know it.
Conversely, motorists flout unreal
istic traffic laws. Bad law is an invi-
tation to lawbreaking-no to be toll
Grated, but to be changed. At one
time the speed limit on the Merritt
Parkway in Connecticut was 40 miles
an hour. The degree to which drivers
ignored the limit was dramatically
demonstrated when two state police
cars, driving below the limit, pa
rolled the two-lane highway side by
side. The traffic backup was several
niles long. So Connecticut raised the
speed limit to 55 miles an hour and
las we have noted-enforced it.
These, then, would be start on
a new approach to traffic safety;
Reasonable laws, strictly enforced;
meaningful licensing procedures;
driver training and education aimed
III