Technology Can Save Life

Red light running and speeding are real problems that jeopardize the safety and lives of Americans on a daily basis. Photo enforcement, a proven method of increasing road and intersection safety, is one of the solutions to the dangers of speeding red light running. This technology has already yielded undeniable proof of its effectiveness in saving lives. Consider the following red light camera and speed camera success stories:

New Orleans, LA — red light cameras led to an 85% drop in red light running and speed cameras led to an 84% drop in speeding.

Montgomery County, MD ― relative to comparison sites drivers traveling more than 10 mph above posted speed limits declined by about 70% at locations with both warning signs and speed camera enforcement.

Council Bluffs, IA ― a 90% reduction in red light running crashes.

Washington, DC ― red light running fatalities were reduced from 16 to 2 in the first two years of red light cameras.

Fairfax, VA ― a 44% reduction in red light running crashes.

Oxnard, CA ― a 22% reduction in red light crashes citywide.

New York City ― a 34% reduction in red light violations.

Technology is a double edge sword, cell phone technology can be the cause of intersection and red light running and red light camera technology can be an effective enforcement tool. For these and other Tennessee highway safety tips, visit the website of the experienced Nashville personal injury lawyers at Phillip Miller & Associates and educate yourself and your family and friends.

In the quarter century from 1985 through 2009, the lives of 1,055,881 men, women, and children have ended violently as the result of motor vehicle crashes in the United States. Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for children, teens, and young adults.

Statistics from the United States Department of Transportation indicate that 33,808 people died in motor vehicle crashes in 2009. Although this represents the fewest people killed in crashes in a single year since 1950, it also represents an average of 93 lives needlessly cut short on an average day as the result of crashes on our roads.

Since 2006, the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety has been sponsoring research to better understand traffic safety culture. The Foundation’s long-term term vision is to create a “social climate in which traffic safety is highly valued and rigorously pursued.” In 2008, the AAA Foundation conducted the first annual Traffic Safety Culture Index, a nationally-representative telephone survey, to begin to assess a few key indicators of the degree to which traffic safety is valued and is being pursued.

Summary of Major Findings

Personal experience with crashes

• One of every two Americans has been involved in a serious crash, has had a friend or relative seriously injured or killed in a crash, or both.

Perceptions of safety

• More than half of all drivers (52%) say driving feels less safe today than it did 5 years ago a 17-percentage-point increase from only a year ago. Nearly half cite some form of driver distraction as the main reason or as a reason for their feeling less safe.

Attitudes and behaviors: Drinking and driving

• Drivers view drinking and driving as a very serious threat, virtually all drivers disapprove of drinking and driving and acknowledge that others also disapprove of it, and very few drivers admit drinking and driving (fewer than 2 drivers in 100 admit having done so in the past month).

• There is almost universal support for requiring alcohol-ignition interlocks for drivers convicted of DWI more than once, and more than 2 in 3 Americans support requiring interlocks for first-time DWI offenders.

Attitudes and behaviors: Cell phone use and texting

• Cell phone use while driving has become widespread—more than 2 in 3 drivers report talking on their cell phone while driving in the past month; more than 1 in 3 say they do so fairly often or regularly. There is moderate social disapproval toward using a hand-held cell phone while driving, but over half of all drivers believe incorrectly that most others actually approve of it. Presently, people are generally accepting of hands-free cell phone use.

• Most people view drivers texting and emailing while driving as a very serious threat to their own personal safety and consider it completely unacceptable. However, many drivers don’t perceive social disapproval from others. Nearly 1 in 4 drivers (24%) admit to texting or emailing while driving.

• A two-thirds majority of Americans support restricting the use of hand-held cell phones while driving, but more people oppose (50%) than support (46%) an outright ban on using any type of cell phone (including hands-free) while driving. There is strong support for laws restricting texting while driving.

Attitudes and behaviors: Speeding

• Speeding on freeways is widespread—45% of drivers say they have driven 15 mph over the speed limit on a freeway in the past month—and nearly 1 in 3 say they consider it acceptable to do so. In contrast, driving 15 mph over the speed limit on residential streets is much less common, and is rated as one of the most unacceptable things that a driver can do.

• Nearly 2 in 3 drivers report at least occasionally feeling pressure from other drivers to drive faster than they want to drive; more than 1 in 3 say they feel such pressure fairly often or regularly.

• More than 2 in 3 Americans support having more police on the roads to enforce speed limits.

Attitudes and behaviors: Red light running

• Most drivers view it as unacceptable to drive through a traffic light that has already turned red if they could have stopped safely; however, 1 in 3 drivers admit doing this in the past month.

Attitudes and behaviors: Drowsy driving

• Most drivers view driving while extremely drowsy as a serious threat to their safety and a completely unacceptable behavior, however, more than 1 in 4 still admit to driving when they were so tired that they had a hard time keeping their eyes open at some point in the past month.

Attitudes and behaviors: Seat belt use

• Most drivers view it as unacceptable to drive without wearing a seatbelt, and more than 3 of 4 say that they never do; however, nearly 1 in 10 admits that they drive without wearing their seat belt fairly often or regularly.

• 2 of every 3 Americans support laws allowing police officers to stop and ticket a driver for not wearing a seat belt even if they’re not breaking any other law.

For information on Tennessee highway safety issues and advice if you or a loved one is injured or killed in a Tennessee automobile accident contact Phillip Miller & Associates.

Aggressive Driving or Road Rage?

As law enforcement agencies develop their programs, they should define aggressive driving based on their state laws, customs and practices by the agency, and by the public’s understanding.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) defines aggressive driving as, “when individuals commit a combination of moving traffic offenses so as to endanger other persons or property.” Some other communities define aggressive driving as “the operation of a motor vehicle involving three or more moving violations as part of a single continuous sequence of driving acts, which is likely to endanger any person or property.”

To avoid conflict with the term road rage, departments should clearly identify that issue and train their officers to use the correct terminology during the program as well as during traffic stops and public information opportunities. Road rage differs from aggressive driving. It is a criminal offense and is “an assault with a motor vehicle or other dangerous weapon by the operator or passenger(s) of one motor vehicle on the operator or passenger(s) of another motor vehicle or is caused by an incident that occurred on a roadway.”

Some behaviors typically associated with aggressive driving include: exceeding the posted speed limit, following too closely, erratic or unsafe lane changes, improperly signaling lane changes, failure to obey traffic control devices (stop signs, yield signs, traffic signals, railroad grade cross signals, etc.). Law enforcement agencies should include red light running as part of their definition of aggressive driving. NHTSA calls the act of red light running as one of the most dangerous forms of aggressive driving.

If you or a loved one is injured or killed in a Tennessee car accident caused by an aggressive driver, contact the experienced Nashville automobile accident attorneys at Phillip Miller & Associates.

Redlight Running is Aggressive Driving

The local Knoxville Tennessee media report failed to mention some critical information about the driver of a Ford Mustang at Cedar Bluff Road and Fox Lonas Road who was speeding and ran a red light and crashed into a motor vehicle that had the right of way. Several people, including a 7-month-old child were hospitalized as a result of this stupid act.

Speeding is one of the most prevalent factors contributing to traffic crashes. The economic cost of speeding-related crashes is estimated to be in excess of 40.4 billion dollars per year. In 2007, speeding was a contributing factor in 31 percent of all fatal crashes, and 13,040 lives were lost in speeding-related crashes.

The high fatality rate associated with red-light-running crashes is partly attributable to the fact that they are usually “T-bone,” or side-impact, crashes involving high speeds (since drivers often accelerate to get through a red light quickly). Indeed, images of vehicles broadsided at intersections often show cars cut in two or with pulverized midsections.

If you or a loved one is injured in a Nashville Automobile accident caused by a speeding red light runner contact the experienced Nashville auto attorneys at Phillip Miller & Associates and find out about your rights and remedies.

He Ran The Light Doing 70 MPH

A Bartlett Tennessee man wasn’t feeling any pain and he wasn’t using his brain when he got behind the wheel of his motor vehicle back in 2009. He had already had problems with drinking and driving and was well aware that he didn’t have a valid drivers license.

He was driving 70 mph in downtown Memphis at 2 AM when he ran a red light and ran over and killed a 37-year-old Alabama man. While he was out on bond, even after he had killed an man, he was busted for possession of drugs.

Last week he pled guilty to vehicular homicide involving intoxication, driving on a revoked license and to charges of drug possession. His sentencing is coming up soon and it is expected that he is going to catch some serious pen time. My prayers go out to the family and friends of this man and I also hope that the driver will somehow find himself and get out from the slavery of drugs and alcohol.

If you or a loved one is injured or killed in a Tennessee automobile accident caused by a drunk driver you owe it to yourself to contact the experienced Nashville auto accident lawyers at Phillip Miller & Associates.

Camera Technology Saves Lives

The yacking hens that sit around the Waffle Shop in Red Bank Tennessee and complain about traffic safety technology programs to save lives, such as red light and speed reduction cameras have lost their drive to get rid of what they refer to as a violation of their constitutional rights. I guess they mean their right to speed, run red lights and kill innocent pedestrians.

Unfortunately the victory was not won by common sense but rather by the cost of breaking the contract. The new Mayor, pandering to the “know-nothings”, was against them and the first thing he tried to do was to get rid of them. Turns out, it would cost a pretty penny for the city to buy their way out of a contract with American Traffic Solutions.

Two new studies have once again demonstrated the deterrent value of using automated enforcement cameras to reduce red light running. A new review of traffic data from the City of Philadelphia conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has shown that the introduction of red light cameras after lengthening the yellow-light phase has virtually eliminated red light running violations at two problem intersections.

Researchers tracked signal violation rates at intersections before and after extending the yellow light sequence and again after red light camera enforcement had been in effect for about a year. The first step reduced signal violations by 36 percent. The cameras reduced the remaining violations by 96 percent . At the same time, violations were virtually unchanged at two control group intersections.

Another red light running study conducted by researchers from Old Dominion University in Virginia, reviewing data collected both before, during and after the City of Virginia Beach’s six-month deployment of red light technology before Virginia’s red light camera authorizing law was allowed the sunset. The results showed that red light running violations more than tripled in just the first year after the law expired. Red light running at the several intersections that had previously been equipped with red light cameras is now worse than it was before they were installed.

If you or a loved one is injured or killed in a Tennessee automobile accident caused by a speeding driver or a red light runner contact the experienced Nashville automobile accident attorneys at Phillip Miller & Associates and find out about your rights and remedies at no charge.

Camera Technology Saves Lives

As an experienced Tennessee automobile accident lawyer I have often spoken publicly and in this Blog about my support of photo enforcement camera technology

The increasing use of photo enforcement has been fueled by escalating violations combined with growing public support, advances in technology, and mounting documentation of their safety benefits. Photo enforcement technology has been shown to be a promising tool that:

• Leads to safer driving habits

• Saves lives

• Reduces traffic crashes and dangerous driving

• Reduces health care costs

• Increases police officer safety and public safety

• Responds to public concerns

• Creates a violator-funded system that can be used to pay for increased public safety.

Automated traffic enforcement has turned the corner. Once viewed as an emerging technology that showed promise as a traffic safety tool, it has matured into a well-established strategy proven —again and again — to reduce crashes and save lives. Simply stated, it works.

Recent news from Bluff City, Tennessee reported that Nearly 1,700 people were the first motorists to be cited in Bluff City, Tenn., since new traffic cameras were installed. They are accused of speeding through a 1.3-mile stretch of U.S. 11E that is a 45 mph zone.

Several legal challenges have been launched against the use of this technology but in my opinion they are frivolous and are destined to go nowhere. Speeding and running red lights are the leading causes of fatal Tennessee auto accidents and the proper way to change the culture is through education and enforcement. Traffic camera technology is a promising step in the right direction.

If you or a loved one is injured or killed in a Tennessee automobile accident caused by a speeder or red light runner contact the experienced Nashville auto accident lawyers at Phillip Miller & Associates and protect your rights.

News from West Tennessee: Millington Tennessee’s new red light traffic camera system will start issuing warning citations at four intersections along U.S. 51 this coming Tuesday.

As an experienced Tennessee auto accident lawyer I have made clear my support for red light and speed camera technologies. More than 100,000 crashes a year are caused by drivers running red lights, killing some 950 people and injuring 90,000 others, making it a leading cause of fatal crashes in metropolitan areas, according to the Department of Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Worse, the numbers are on the rise and this is a situation where people are dying from something that’s 100 percent preventable.

Two new studies have once again demonstrated the deterrent value of using automated enforcement cameras to reduce red light running. A new review of traffic data from the City of Philadelphia conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has shown that the introduction of red light cameras after lengthening the yellow-light phase has virtually eliminated red light running violations at two problem intersections.

Researchers tracked signal violation rates at intersections before and after extending the yellow light sequence and again after

Red Light Camera Enforcement

had been in effect for about a year. The first step reduced signal violations by 36 percent. The cameras reduced the remaining violations by 96 percent. At the same time, violations were virtually unchanged at two control group intersections.

If you or a loved one is injured or killed in a red light collision contact the experienced Nashville automobile accident lawyers at Phillip Miller & Associates and find out about your rights and remedies.

Red Light Camera Enforcement Works

For those of you have kept up with my Blog you know that I have closely followed the battle over the use, by municipalities, of Red Light Cameras. That battle took an interesting turn this past week when Hamilton County Chancellor Frank Brown dismissed two lawsuits challenging their use in Red Bank and Chattanooga Tennessee. The Plaintiff’s sought millions of dollars in damages.

The Plaintiff’s had argued that the cameras were installed and operating before the legislature approved their use and that those people who received tickets should be awarded damages. Not so said the Chancellor, who stated in his opinion that, “A municipality has the primary responsibility for enforcing traffic regulations within their city limits as it deems proper.”

Each year crashes involving red light running claim the lives of more than 800 people and injure another 200,000 people. More than half of the deaths in red light running crashes are other motorists and pedestrians, so there should be no debate about the fact that red light runners are dangerous drivers who put other road users at risk.

A recent Insurance Institute for Highway Safety study in Oxnard, California, showed that red light running violations dropped a total of 42 percent after well-publicized photo enforcement was introduced. Another study in Fairfax, Virginia, showed that violations declined about 40 percent after one year of photo enforcement. A key to all effective traffic law enforcement is publicity; without it there is no deterrent effect, and the purpose of red light cameras is deterrence.

If you or a loved one is injured or killed in an intersection crash by a red-light runner, contact the experienced Tennessee automobile accident attorneys at Phillip Miller & Associates and find out about your rights and remedies.

Red Light Cameras Save Lives

Traffic crashes are the single most significant cause of preventable death and injury in North America. In 2007 in the U.S., almost 900 people were killed and an estimated 153,000 were injured in crashes that involved red light running. Public costs exceed $14 billion per year, and more than half of the deaths in red light running crashes are other motorists and pedestrians. There is no doubt that red light runners are dangerous drivers who irresponsibly put others at risk. In America’s cities ― where too often the yellow light has come to symbolize “hurry up” instead of “slow down” ― red light running is the leading cause of all urban automobile crashes.

The American public recognizes the problem, is deeply concerned about red light running and supports the use of red light cameras. A nationwide survey sponsored by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and conducted by the Gallup Organization found that 75 percent of drivers favored the use of red light cameras. Most Americans (96 percent) are afraid of being hit by a red light runner, but nearly one in five admit to running a red light in the last ten intersections. The leading excuse given for red light running was neither frustration nor road rage; it was “being in a hurry.”

Yet, here in Tennessee it appears that a number of citizens see red light cameras as a “Big Brother ” ploy to take away their rights and a vocal minority of ignorant people are lobbying for laws that prohibit them. How stupid is that? This is a proven technology that saves lives and millions of dollars in insurance claims and some paranoid fools who have nothing better to do, usually citizens who have received tickets for running red lights,  are pressuring spineless self-centered politicians to enact laws that prohibit them. Shame on us.

Check out my web site at www.seriousinjury.com for more information about this subject.