Speed Limiters: U.S. Revs Up Interest in Slowing Heavy Trucks & Buses (FairWarning)

Fair Warning’s Paul Feldman has written an article on the recently proposed federal regulation to require big rigs to utilize speed limiters: Speed Limiters for Big Rigs After Moving at a Crawl, U.S. Revs Up Interest in Slowing Heavy Trucks and Buses

Our crash involved a trucker going too fast for the traffic conditions but not necessarily over the speed limit. In fact, there were many factors involved in our tragic outcome. It makes me wonder what all leads to speeding trucks, as well as speeding trucks getting involved in deadly crashes. What is the root of the problem here and what is the best way to address it?

On the one hand, on the other hand: Speed Limiters: The Controversy of Speed Differentials Between Trucks & Cars

I am still hoping to organize a Tired Trucker Roundtable for some down to earth discussion so we can all get on the same page.

Tired Trucker Roundtable

Barack Obama Op-Ed: “Self-driving, yes, but also safe” Would he be willing to discuss this with me?

President Obama wrote an Op-Ed about the role of government in overseeing the development of self-driving cars. I find one of his comments very interesting:

There are always those who argue that government should stay out of free enterprise entirely, but I think most Americans would agree we still need rules to keep our air and water clean, and our food and medicine safe. That’s the general principle here. What’s more, the quickest way to slam the brakes on innovation is for the public to lose confidence in the safety of new technologies.

Both government and industry have a responsibility to make sure that doesn’t happen. And make no mistake: If a self-driving car isn’t safe, we have the authority to pull it off the road. We won’t hesitate to protect the American public’s safety.

See more herehttp://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/Op-Ed/2016/09/19/Barack-Obama-Self-driving-yes-but-also-safe/stories/201609200027

Well then, President Obama, I would like to discuss with you the unsafe trucks driving on the road which, at any moment, could kill an unsuspecting member of the American public  — as one did my two daughters, Mary and AnnaLeah — due to inadequate underride protection.  Are you ready to exercise that authority and take decisive action?

  1. Set a National Vision Zero Goal.
  2. Establish a White House Vision Zero Task Force.
  3. Sign a Vision Zero Executive Order to authorize the Department of Transportation to adopt a Vision Zero Rulemaking Policy.
  4. And then appoint a National Traffic Safety Ombudsman to advocate for the victims of vehicle violence, to protect the American public, and to mobilize citizens to act on their own behalf through a nationwide network of Vision Zero/Traffic Safety Community Action Groups.

Let’s have a serious talk about this. I’ll be in DC next week. Give me a call.

Unsafe TrucksViolence

The Glacial Pace of Truck Underride Improvements (along with countless other safety issues)

Recent (and past) events were spurring me to write this post this morning based on frustration with the way that progress is too often blocked and unnecessarily delayed on safety efforts when the people and organizations who could do something to prevent deaths tragically wait for somebody else to act before taking responsibility to move forward themselves.

The result is a Catch 22, chicken & egg dilemma which moves as slow as crystallized honey with the result that countless people die when something could have been done to make sure that they did not meet an untimely end due to Death by Motor Vehicle.

1a85et

So I appreciated a Tweet by the IIHS which I noticed this morning before I was able to start writing this post:

Well said, IIHS! I couldn’t have said it better myself!

See the glacial pace of underride prevention progress here: timeline-banner-for-underride-roundtable-meeting

I still say that a National Traffic Safety Ombudsman could be instrumental in changing this sorry state of affairs!

Why rely on driver reaction to avoid truck side underride when a side guard could prevent tragedy?

I just read a very detailed explanation for why a driver might not react in time to avoid riding under the side of a semi-trailer — one without a side guard I might add. Well, that is all very interesting and we might learn something useful from it.

But, why on earth would we rely on driver behavior (especially in such an unexpected scenario) when the installation of a side guard could so easily save the driver’s life?!

Save Lives

Of course, taking a comprehensive approach to safety makes the most sense –one which makes other factors important as well, including:

  • Visibility and conspicuity.
  • Adequate parking for trucks.
  • Making it illegal for trucks to make U-turns.

Either or

Teaching the World How We Grieve: Acknowledging our grief anniversaries.

Yesterday, I had a conversation on a facebook group about grieving:  Teaching the World How We Grieve: Acknowledging our grief anniversaries.

One of the things which I had mentioned was this:

I still have many moments when I can’t believe they are really gone. And I cling to anything of theirs. In case you hadn’t noticed, writing about it and them helps me. Sewing quilts with their clothes has been catharthtic.

Just yesterday, I was in a whirl because I had to let go of a car which had been given to us after the crash to replace ours. It recently had an electrical fire and yesterday we found out that the insurance company was totaling it. It is a negative reminder of the crash/loss but it is also a connection to them that will now be gone forever. And a reminder of the many ways in which people reached out to us. I don’t even know how to describe the mess of feelings that produced. LETTING GO. . .

I had one of those clinging moments again today when my son took out some boxes from the shed and asked me if I wanted him to break them down to put in recycling. I said, “No!” — not because the boxes were in great shape but because they were ones which Mary had labeled when we were moving from Texas.

When the crash happened, we were living in a rental house, and exactly two months (the Fourth of July) after the crash, we moved into our present house. That’s when I found those boxes. There were many boxes labeled by her, but these were boxes of her college sister’s clothes left at home, and Mary was being silly and spelling her sister’s name every way she could think of.

That’s Mary for you.

little-red-hen-016 little-red-hen-023 little-red-hen-022 little-red-hen-021 little-red-hen-019 little-red-hen-018

 

When we know a person, we often know their handwriting. It is a part of them. And I couldn’t bear to throw away that part of her. She will never again write anything — even on a moving box.

little-red-hen-017little-red-hen-026

Mary with Oscar The Catsusanna mary annaleah in costumeNever forgotten

I wonder if she would think that I am being silly.

Nader 50 years later: Federal Regulation Saves Millions of Lives, But. . .

Nader wrote a blogpost about the recent 50th anniversary of the signing of the Highway Safety Act on 9/9/1966.

Fifty years ago this month (on September 9, 1966), President Lyndon Johnson signed into law the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety laws that launched a great life-saving program for the American People.

I was there that day at the White House at the invitation of President Johnson who gave me one of the signing pens. In 1966, traffic fatalities reached 50,894 or 5.50 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled. By 2014, the loss of life was 32,675 or 1.07 fatalities per hundred million vehicle miles traveled. A huge reduction!

This was an astounding success for a federal safety program that included mandatory vehicle-safety standards (seat belts, airbags, better brakes, tires and handling among other advances) and upgrading driver and highway-safety standards. . .

Despite, many good programs and safety standards, there is still a ways to go, according to Nader:

If the auto company bosses had liberated their own engineers and scientists and cooperated with the federal regulators, who early on were physicians and engineers, even more casualties would have been prevented.

Today, the challenges remain in the upgrading of the operational and safety aspects of motor vehicles, especially large trucks, improvements in highway infrastructure and handling drivers distracted by cell phones or under the influence. Much is being written of futuristic self-driving, autonomous vehicles. Don’t be taken in with the hype, or the arrogant reliance on algorithms. It will be many years, if ever, until the entire vehicle fleet is converted into unhackable, driverless machines.

Meanwhile, modest semi-autonomous braking systems, with drivers still at the steering wheel, are here and will improve. There will be other systems inviting the dependency of drivers which will raise questions of ultimate control of a fast-moving vehicle. . .

In conclusion, Nader has this to say:

Democracy and its result – a more just society – is not a spectator sport. People have to organize to challenge the forces of injustice.

America, are we ready to actively participate in advocating for our own safety?

Life & Death

 

“Breaking Through Power: Help Us Make Activism Great Again” Ralph Nader Conference in DC

I received an invitation in an email this morning:

If you have had enough of:

  • Vehicle Violence
  • Injustice
  • Corporate Control of Government and Media
  • Sickness Care for Profit
  • Revolving Door Governance
  • Inequality
  • Dominance of Corporate Lobbyists
  • Gun Violence
  • Crime in the Suites
  • Inadequate Care of Veterans
  • Homelessness
  • Inferior Infrastructure
  • For Profit Education
  • Military Industrial Priorities
  • Duopoly Politics
  • Etc., etc.

Attend this upcoming Conference by Ralph Nader on “Breaking Through Power” to learn how we the people can do better.

This conference aims to mobilize citizens to bring about change.

I was glad to see Vehicle Violence listed — an issue which sorely needs addressing. Actually, I had already planned on going to this conference in DC, as I have been invited to sit on a panel of tort victims — when tort law is being discussed on the final day of the conference, September 29.

Good thing. Someone needs to look out for vulnerable victims of vehicle violence
Gertie reaching for Mary ...Susanna's film

“Trucking Regulations Don’t Address Biggest Risk – Unsafe Behavior” by a husband/wife trucker team

You will want to read this in-depth article on truck safety full of practical knowledge and insight — written by a trucker husband/wife team.

Opinion: Trucking Regulations Don’t Address Biggest Risk – Unsafe Behavior, Trucks.com, by Jeff & Linda Halling, September 8, 2016

Written by Jeff and Linda Halling, a husband-and-wife driving team based in Missouri. This is one in a series of periodic guest columns by industry thought leaders.

While the federal government is adding new trucking industry regulations — including speed limiters for big rigs and electronic logging devices for drivers — these moves don’t really address the root causes of truck crashes.

If we really want to improve safety for truckers and the motoring public, we need to focus on the base reasons for unsafe behavior. We believe better training is key — teaching drivers good work habits. That will reduce the frequency of truck crashes. . .

Read more here: Trucking Regulations Don’t Address Biggest Risk – Unsafe Behavior

jeff-and-linda-halling-photo-credit-jeff-halling

9/9/16 Motor Safety Act 50th Anniv. Miles to Go from Pres. Johnson vision of ‘cure for highway disease’

Despite much progress in highway safety, the death toll still is rising from one year to the next. Why do we mindlessly accept it? Why don’t we rally together and conquer this dreadful enemy of innocent lives?

1a85et

September 9 marks the 50th anniversary of President Johnson’s signing of the Federal Highway Safety Act of 1966:

According to the July 15, 1966, Public Works committee report on the House version of the bill (H.R. 13290), each state must “have a highway safety program approved by the [Secretary of Commerce] . . . in accordance with uniform standards to be approved by the Secretary.” The legislation addressed a broad range of issues: driver education; licensing; pedestrian performance; vehicle registration and inspection; traffic control; highway design and maintenance; accident prevention, investigation, and record keeping; and emergency services. Congress authorized funds for distribution to the states, with a requirement that each state implement a highway safety program by December 31, 1968, or suffer a 10 percent reduction in apportioned funds. The legislation enjoyed strong, bipartisan support in the House. Chairman Fallon stated, “[This bill] continues the policy of meaningful cooperation between the States and the Federal Government on highway matters. I believe it is a firm step forward in the struggle to save lives, and I urge that we act with strong voice to put it into effect.” The measure passed the House by a vote of 318-3, and President Johnson signed the Highway Safety Act into law on September 9, 1966.

I only wish that we could get that same kind of support for the appointment of a National Traffic Safety Ombudsman and a nationwide network of  citizens active in community Traffic Safety Advocacy Groups in 2016!

Yet, according to a recent FairWarning article, Miles to Go on Highway Safety, we are far from acting as responsibly and conscientiously  as we would if we really cared about saving innocent lives from preventable vehicle violence — and that includes the oversight of “self-driving” vehicle technology development!

 

Growing list of concerns about driverless cars

Concerns about driverless cars pop up more often than not. Some which I read today:

  1. NHTSA creates safety vacuum: Opposing view, Clarence Ditlow, USA Today,  Driverless vehicles are a marketing marvel. But it’s not a safety miracle as the auto industry and its captive regulator, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, claim. In its zeal to advance driverless vehicles, NHTSA has forgotten its mission is to ensure safety, not promote gee-whiz vehicle technology to increase sales. It is an inherent conflict of interest for any agency to both promote and regulate technology. . .
  2. The other bump on path to driverless cars: Crumbling roads Richard Truett Automotive News You should take claims of self-driving cars being road-ready soon with a 50-pound bag of salt, not a grain.

    While automakers, suppliers and ride providers such as Uber race to develop and deploy the technology, one aspect of self-driving cars is not being reported on much, if at all: The nation’s infrastructure is simply not ready for cars that can drive themselves 100 percent safely, 100 percent of the time. . . 

Could a National Traffic Safety Ombudsman advocate for solutions to these and other traffic safety issues? Just sayin’. . .

17hou5