What if......there were no more speed traps?
___________________________________________________________What if there were no traffic laws? No police gotcha-cars with radar guns? No speed traps? Would that be a good thing? As much as we all hate getting pinched, most people would say it would be chaos without traffic laws, that traffic tickets are necessary annoyances to keep us safe. But are they?
In Europe there are experiments in progress to compare accident and fatality rates in areas where there are no traffic laws with areas where the usual traffic laws apply. The results may surprise you. The absence of laws and even of traffic controls such as stop lights and stop signs (using roundabouts in lieu of intersection controls) creates a safer environment for drivers and their passengers than controlled intersections and traffic laws.
How can that be? It is simple. The absence of traffic laws or controlled intersections leaves drivers to judge for themselves what speed is safe for conditions, and makes them more vigilant at intersections. As a result, drivers take more responsibility for determining what is a safe speed in every situation, and are more aware of other drivers since other than roundabouts, there are no traffic controls.
In our current system, drivers often decide that a particular speed is safe, and drive that speed, but because it is faster than the posted limit, they are subject to ticketing and eventually, with too many tickets, could lose their driving privileges or insurance. It may be that under the conditions in the time and place of the "violation" they were not driving unsafely, but because of arbitrary speed limits, they are subject to harassment by police and the resulting risk to their license and insurance.
Some traffic laws actually put drivers at greater risk than the absence of laws. The other side of the posted speed limit coin is that in many conditions, the posted limit is itself unsafe. If a driver causes an accident for driving too fast for conditions, even if it is equal to or less than the posted limit, they will be ticketed. If drivers are expected to judge the conditions relative to the speed limit on the downside, why are they not allowed to do the same on the upside? In fact, why not just allow drivers to be the judge of speed relative to conditions in all situations and eliminate arbitrary limits and all other traffic laws?
The fact of the matter is that most drivers love their lives, their passengers and even their cars enough not to put any of the above at risk intentionally, speed limit or no speed limit. Arbitrary limits, and sneak cops enforcing them are not necessary to make most drivers behave responsibly, and don't deter the maniac few who have no regard for life or limb or property. Therefore, if someone drives irresponsibly and causes an accident, they are subject to civil suit, and if sufficiently egregious, also to criminal charges for negligence, so why should we be taxed to pay police officers to harass us?
In this time of recession and budget crises at all levels of government, one expense we could easily eliminate is that of traffic law enforcement. Of course traffic tickets are a source of revenue for municipalities, but that is another issue. If speed traps are set up for the purpose of stealing money from unsuspecting drivers, then it is well past time for such practices to be discontinued. If traffic law enforcement is intended to save lives and protect drivers, it is an unnecessary expenditure since studies show that the vast majority of drivers are safe whether or not they are legal. Either way, there is no place in a free and democratic society for otherwise law abiding, responsible citizens to be harassed and extorted by agents of government.