Opinion: Putting Muscle in the 'No-Zone'
By now, most people involved in highway and motor carrier safety have heard about the No-Zone program, and possibly even American Trucking Associations’ version of it, the How To Drive program. You have probably seen the No-Zone brochures, posters and vehicle decals highlighting the programs’ safety messages.
In fact, more and more responsible organizations are actively promoting the No-Zone program, and communicating its messages in a genuine effort to reduce the likelihood of car-truck collisions. Why? Because they believe the program and its messages can make a difference.
I am a firm believer in the program, because it attempts to address a significant piece of the crash problem involving cars and trucks — the lack of knowledge in the motoring public regarding the large blind spots around commercial vehicles and the greater stopping distances of large trucks and buses.
However, the program is solely educational in nature. While public education efforts can and do work, they work much better when coupled with strong laws and tough, ongoing enforcement of those laws.
To be most effective, the No-Zone program needs to move from a purely educational program to a program that also promotes new traffic laws, and tough enforcement of them.
You don’t have to look any further than the experience of seat belt use in this country to understand why we need to move the No-Zone program to the next level.
Seat belt use rates were very low in the 1970s and early 1980s. After initial seat belt laws were passed by some states, government and highway safety organizations tried to educate the motoring public on the safety benefits of seat belts in order to increase usage. Increases in the use rate occurred.
However, the first round of state seat belt laws were “secondary laws.” That is, they could not be enforced by traffic patrol officers unless a driver was being stopped for a moving violation (speeding, failing to yield the right of way, etc.). For several years now, the federal government has been promoting — and the states have been adopting — “primary” seat belt laws, which allow enforcement officers to stop motorists solely for not wearing a seat belt. These laws provide a greater deterrent — that is, drivers are more likely to buckle up if they know they can be stopped and fined for that offense alone.
Tougher primary enforcement seat belt laws are making a real difference in use rates. The average belt use rate in these states is 17 percentage points higher than in states with secondary enforcement laws.
It’s time for those of us in the highway safety community to begin advocating new traffic laws and enforcement cues designed to address unsafe driving behavior in the No-Zones.
For example, the front No-Zone is an area directly in front of a large truck or bus, which is also known as the safety cushion. Professional truck and bus drivers attempt to maintain a safety cushion directly in front of their vehicle, providing them with a safe stopping distance in the event that traffic slows suddenly.
Far too often on our increasingly congested roads motorists cut in front of trucks and buses because the safety cushion provides them the opportunity to do so. If the average motorist knew that truck and bus drivers need nearly twice the time and distance to stop as cars, and they knew that there was a strongly enforced law with a stiff penalty for encroaching in the front No-Zone, I believe this unsafe driving behavior would probably occur much less frequently.
Commercial drivers who don’t attempt to create and maintain appropriate safety cushions should also suffer the traffic enforcement consequences as well.
Clearly, there are some existing traffic laws that address unsafe, No-Zone driving behavior, such as tailgating and unsafe lane changes. However, they are not enforced in the No-Zone context. I believe there may be several additional traffic laws and traffic enforcement cues that can and should be developed by the federal government as model state legislation. This model could be promoted by the federal government and highway safety organizations to reduce the often severe consequences of car-truck collisions that occur because of unsafe driving behavior.
The No-Zone program as a national public education effort has taken off over the last four to five years as a result of the leadership of the Federal Highway Administration, the support of the motor carrier industry and other interested parties. The time has come for the supporters and promoters of this worthwhile program to advocate ways to make it even more effective.
You just read some of my thoughts . . . are there others?
