Construction Zone Tickets: What They Don’t Want You To Know
By Jim Baxter, NMA President
Highway work zone accidents and fatalities have been a hot topic over the past decade. Like most hot topics dealing with highway safety issues the misinformation, distortions, and propaganda are dominant in the headlines.
For example, the political elite would have us believe that highway workers are the primary victims of callus, reckless, and impaired drivers who take their pleasure by careening amongst orange plastic barrels. You might find in a footnote that eight out of nine work zone fatalities are motorists and not workers.
Another even more remote footnote might mention that most of the highway workers that are injured or die in work zone accidents are the victims of direct work related accidents that do not involve passing cars and trucks.
However, not to be dissuaded by facts or reality, state legislators have pumped out numerous laws that increase traffic fines in work zones, assess more fines for harming highway workers, and promote enforcement campaigns aimed at applying these new penalties.
So what are the results of all this legislative flogging?
A recent University of Kansas Study that explored the causes of work zone accidents referenced a telling national statistic:
- In 1999 work zone fatalities totaled 872.
- By 2003 the number of work zone fatalities had increased 18 percent (1028 fatalities).
While it wouldn’t be fair to lay the blame for these deaths on the legislative disinformation campaigns and doubling and tripling of fines, it’s clear they haven’t improved the situation.
To the degree that this political hucksterism displaced and sidetracked programs and policies that could have reduced work zone accidents it IS partially responsible for the end result; more accidents, more injuries and more deaths.
Work zones can be managed to move traffic safely. Better signage, better lane management, better timing of active work projects, relevant speed regulation, and giving first priority to traffic movement during peak travel periods, such as holidays, are all constructive objectives.
These measures, and others, require the recognition that work zone safety is primarily about drivers, not highway workers, and in fact it is the highway project managers that should be held responsible for improving work zone safety.
Certainly, drivers need to exercise caution in construction zones, but they are not in control of the traffic environment, the project managers are. Ladling on more fines and penalties may work, as long as the recipients are the people responsible for managing construction and work zones.
Other Related Articles
To change the picture next to your comments, sign up at Gravatar.com. Each picture is associated with a particular email address. (This is a third-party service not affiliated with NMA.)
Ok, I can agree with the highway ONLY portion of your mission. However, I still think there should be limits in each lane. Example, the “fast lane” should be something like 80-90, the middle lane at 60-70, and the far right something like 50-60. That I can agree with! I think most law enforcement would agree with that too. Too bad those decisions can not be made by us. That is up to our law makers to determine and for us to enforce. Not the other way around. Don’t get mad at us because people complain about speeders. My “issue” has been, and will be, red light runners. But the argument from every driver for ANY traffic violation always seems to be the exact same thing! “Don’t you have anything else better to do?” There needs to be rules in societies, otherwise chaos will take place. New Orleans post Katrina strike a bell? No rules, then Darwin’s theory!
{“Speeding affects nobody”
Let me guess, neither does drunk driving?}
You don’t understand metaphors, do you?
If I’m running 92 mph in the #2 lane and I pass a guy in the #3 lane who is running 70 mph, he need take NO action, no change of speed or direction, and no evasive action. Whether I’m there or not, his actions remain the same. Why don’t you explain exactly how “speeding” DOES affect other drivers.
{So, since you’re suggesting that there should be NO SPEED LIMITS anywhere, you are suggesting that every state DOT should rebuild every single road to accommodate the fastest driver in the fast car “theorem”.}
No, that’s not what I’m suggest at all and you should know it. Highways are not modified (beyond maintenance and technological improvements as they deteriorate). Drivers are already driving their optimal speeds or very close to them and we are enjoying the best safety rates in the history of America. What we are doing is working fine except for the legal interference, which messes it all up. Removing speed limits on rural highways will not change normal driving speeds significantly. We know this from prior experience as well as multiple academic and scientific studies. Removing rural limits simply makes legal what is already happening. It is up to each driver to drive within the limits of his and his vehicle’s capabilities for the given roadway. It is also disingenuous to conflate urban and rural speed limits and driver behavior.
{ What happens when YOU, Mr. Young, are not THAT driver and a faster driver approaches you from the rear AND at a rate much faster than you? Are you now the problem?}
No, because I move over for faster traffic. I don’t impede other drivers and I expect the same from them.
“Speeding affects nobody”
Let me guess, neither does drunk driving?
So, since you’re suggesting that there should be NO SPEED LIMITS anywhere, you are suggesting that every state DOT should rebuild every single road to accommodate the fastest driver in the fast car “theorem”. What happens when YOU, Mr. Young, are not THAT driver and a faster driver approaches you from the rear AND at a rate much faster than you? Are you now the problem?
Your scenarios are absurd, but I expect that you know that.
As drivers, we should be able to expect all other drivers to be able to comply with the reasonable part of the law, the URROW parts. That includes driving in the rightmost lane if you are traveling much slower than the normal flow of traffic. This is a perfectly reasonable request, is the law in virtually every state, yet is enforced only rarely. Impeding affects many other drivers. Speeding affects nobody.
{Do you work the general public at all?}
I’m not sure what you mean by that nor why it matters. I’m a financial executive and do some side consulting in the movie industry. I used to work at the emergency room of a major trauma hospital (for Joe, that’s Hillcrest).
{ BTW, you still haven’t answered the question of at what point do you consider speed to be unsafe?}
Reread my post, supra. Note that there is no single magic speed but that, just like the phrase says, “for conditions.” 25 may be too fast in the fog and too slow on the freeway. If your car is breaking loose, you probably need to back of a little.
{You said you support “traffic control”. What’s that mean? Everyone decides what is safe for themselves?}
I’m not sure what you reference here. It is a fundamental assumption of traffic engineers that, yes, drivers do decide what speed is safe for them. I’ve said that about 4 times now.
{ So if I can drive my monster truck at 90 mph down your street in front of you house you mean to tell me you have NO OBJECTION to that behavior at all?}
90 mph would be impossible on virtually all residential streets. Try a more reasonable scenario.
{ Tell me, because all you said a couple of times is that you have, should there be a “limit” to driving behavior based on what ever magical number you want to draw from (85th, 93rd, 22nd).}
No, that isn’t what I said. Before you go spouting off nonsense, exposing an unparalleled level of ignorance, ask one of your traffic engineers what the 85th percentile speed is and why it’s important. Hint: it is not an arbitrary number.
{ BTW , we have a four lane road that covers a business area, in 2007 there were 23 crashes, 3 of which were fatal. We did critical speed measurement’s to determine the fastest you could travel this curve and it was 50 mph. Two drivers killed themselves but one crossed the lane an killed a mother of two infants! In your logic we, as traffic officers, should NOT enforce the posted limit of 35! We should do what in order to keep others from dying here? Hire a full time person to stand there flagging down every single driver to tell them it’s a dangerous curve and “have fun” drive at what ever f’ing speed you want? That is truly what I DO NOT understand about your cause!}
You don’t understand because you don’t want to. If you really have such a dangerous road, the solution lies not in law but in re-engineering it. There was a very dangerous road on old hwy 33 near Locust Grove, OK and OKDOT tried lowering the limit with heavy enforcement from OHP. Didn’t work. What it took was moving the roadway. Problem solved.
Where is that road and what jurisdiction does it fall under. I want to contact them to learn more about it and the alleged fatalities
“A speed too fast for conditions is defined as a speed that exceeds the capabilities of car and driver.” GREAT, NOW I UNDERSTAND! So I’ll be over to your house with my top fuel funny car to break 300 mph on your street just about the time you back out of your driveway on your drive to work or the market?
“You don’t get it. That judgment is left up to each individual driver, not the “other person.” There is your answer!!!! That guy in front of you doing 65 thinks that is what is safe for him! You, OTOH, seem to think that EVERYONE must be just like you!
I’m a spectacular shooter! SWAT team, firearms instructor, pistol match team, etc. Let me crack off a round 3/10th’s of an inch from your head with my .308. I can do it! I’m safe, what’s the matter? You wouldn’t trust MY abilities with my rifle?
That’s what your missing. Not everyone thinks the same way as you! Grandpa might think 35 is fast enough for his car and his abilities. Michael Andretti knows that he can do 185 mph while bumping the car in front of him. Do you want to be in that car?
Do you work the general public at all? BTW, you still haven’t answered the question of at what point do you consider speed to be unsafe? You said you support “traffic control”. What’s that mean? Everyone decides what is safe for themselves? So if I can drive my monster truck at 90 mph down your street in front of you house you mean to tell me you have NO OBJECTION to that behavior at all? Tell me, because all you said a couple of times is that you have, should there be a “limit” to driving behavior based on what ever magical number you want to draw from (85th, 93rd, 22nd). BTW , we have a four lane road that covers a business area, in 2007 there were 23 crashes, 3 of which were fatal. We did critical speed measurement’s to determine the fastest you could travel this curve and it was 50 mph. Two drivers killed themselves but one crossed the lane an killed a mother of two infants! In your logic we, as traffic officers, should NOT enforce the posted limit of 35! We should do what in order to keep others from dying here? Hire a full time person to stand there flagging down every single driver to tell them it’s a dangerous curve and “have fun” drive at what ever f’ing speed you want? That is truly what I DO NOT understand about your cause!
{Also, tell me one more thing and I’m out of here. What do YOU define “speed too fast for conditions”?}
A speed too fast for conditions is defined as a speed that exceeds the capabilities of car and driver. 25 mph in heavy fog may be too fast for conditions even though the posted limit is 80 mph. Speed too fast for conditions may be defined by a resulting crash, loss of cohesion, or where closing distances exceed braking distances. Just today, I was running 92 mph between Temecula and San Diego and I was being passed. So 92 mph was not too fast for the conditions. The true danger on that highway (the 15) is going too slow for conditions, e.g., the guy in the #2 lane (of 4, sometimes 6) running 70 mph.
{ When and who should determine when that “other person” is going too fast?}
You don’t get it. That judgment is left up to each individual driver, not the “other person.”
{ If a professional racer drives 100 mph through an area (I won’t say “school zone” because I’m sure you have some moral objection to those too) where children are attempting to cross the roadway to get to a school, should that be consider “unlawful” or “unsafe”?}
Probably. OTOH, how many school zones are there on Interstate highways?
{I have searched! But all I can find are nut jobs telling everyone that the cops are all criminals out to steal your money. And how speed limits are unsafe and cause more crashes than drunk drivers, who you also seem to support.}
You need to reread it.
LE has created a hell of a mess for itself. Beginning in about 1974, far too much LE has concentrated on the low-hanging fruit of speeders, along with secondary and tertiary charges, to be explained by any improvements in traffic safety related to those efforts. You isolated yourselves from the public, now speak your own language, and suffer from virulent institutionalism completely unrelated to your legitimate public safety needs.
I has become apparent much too quickly that you have no interest in a legitimate discussion but are just trolling. If you really want to learn something, you need to check your attitude that because you’re a cop you know more than everybody else on these fora. What you know is much too narrow and much too steeped in LE institutionalism to withstand academic scrutiny.
Also, tell me one more thing and I’m out of here. What do YOU define “speed too fast for conditions”? When and who should determine when that “other person” is going too fast? If a professional racer drives 100 mph through an area (I won’t say “school zone” because I’m sure you have some moral objection to those too) where children are attempting to cross the roadway to get to a school, should that be consider “unlawful” or “unsafe”?
Ima writes:
{You are seriously suggesting that everyone driving on the roadways should be able to pick the speed limit they want to drive?}
In a word, yes. It really is a simple concept and being as close to the law as you claim, you should be able to comprehend this. Engineers set limits according to the 85th percentile rule, setting the limit at the minimization point of the crash incidence curve. Politicians then interfere and lower the limit, thus forcing drivers backwards and up the crash incidence curve in order to be legal. On Interstate-grade and rural highways, the minimization point occurs closer to the 95th percentile, that is, even faster.
Speed limits have never been a part of URROW, do not offer valuable information and provide no benefit to drivers. There is no correlation between speed limits and key safety measures. In harsher terms, speed limits do not affect traffic safety in any way.
{You think we should do away with speed limits? You can’t be serious. Right? Tell me you’re not serious, please.}
Not only am I serious, I’m right and I’ve got all the science on my side. If you have any credible evidence to the contrary, now is the time to offer it.
{I jest a lot to poke fun at you guys but your ideas are flawed.}
Then give us the proof that they are flawed.
{ People constantly run red lights and traffic crashes are taking place every mile.}
Please don’t insult us that way. Traffic crashes, especially fatal crashes are very rare; they do not take place every mile.
{What is the answer guys? Seriously. Tell me the answer!!}
We’ve already told you the answer; you just don’t like it.
“It ain’t what you don’t know that hurts you; it’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.” — Mark Twain. It’s time for you to take a fresh look at your narrow little world.
I have searched! But all I can find are nut jobs telling everyone that the cops are all criminals out to steal your money. And how speed limits are unsafe and cause more crashes than drunk drivers, who you also seem to support. Now, you say that you actually have a position. ??
Ima Safedriver, I don’t think anybody here or on the other bloggs are suggesting the absence of traffic control, I’m sure not. Having said that I’m not going to reiterate the several posts I’ve made elsewhere on this issue. I suggest you check out some of the posts on speed limits ect. There are plenty of posts there to explain some of our positions on the speed limit issue.
You are seriously suggesting that everyone driving on the roadways should be able to pick the speed limit they want to drive? That would be the same as doing away with lines in a fast food restaurant or a theme park. Everyone just mill in and poof! Bedlam erupts. You think we should do away with speed limits? You can’t be serious. Right? Tell me you’re not serious, please. Joe, you mention left lane hogs. As an officer for 17 years when you stop someone for impeding traffic you’d swear you just raped their mother. They curse you out and scream, “Don’t you have anything else better to do?”
Every single red light light runner says, “that light was yellow…”. No one, nowadays , is willing to accept their responsibility for their actions. I jest a lot to poke fun at you guys but your ideas are flawed. Obviously, no government in the modern world operates this way. I went to Puerto Rico not long ago and traffic rules don’t exist and thus Bedlam. People constantly run red lights and traffic crashes are taking place every mile. What is the answer guys? Seriously. Tell me the answer!!
And Hubert, take your buddy Ima Safedriver and troll somewhere else. Your obviously clueless. You make meaningless blanket statements.
A title like Ima Safedriver makes me immediately suspicious that your trolling and not really interested in the issues. Find somewhere else to troll. While your at it don’t break your arm patting yourself on the back for being such safe driver. With the arrogance you portray, why do I get the feeling you could you be one of those left lane hogs?
Ima Safedriver writes:
{What the heck is wrong with you people? Your own numbers speak against your movement! An 18% increase of fatal crashes and you want the DOT to do away with the increased fine amounts? Sounds like we need to make speeding a trip to jail.}
I agree. Let’s set up speeding as a felony, perhaps a capital crime, and watch the public rise up in unison and smack the lawmakers and law enforcers right across their silly greedy faces. That is essentially what happened in VA with their exorbitant “fees”: the public protested and the authoritarians backed off. Yep, speeding as a jailable offense would last about 48 hours because the public would be hanging legislators not in effigy but from trees.
{What’s the answer then? Just let everyone on the road figure out what speed they want to drive . . .[?]}
In a word, yes. That is the way that engineers determine the scientific speed limit, a limit that is then ignored for political purposes.
{If this website would offer a reasonable answer to solve the problem someone might listen to you. Instead you bitch, you’re what’s wrong with America today! I hope all of you get tickets!}
That’s why, at least in part, nobody takes LEOs seriously, instead viewing them as armed thugs bent on collecting as much money as possible. I have been lobbying legislators for years in 4 different states. They rarely take drivers as a serious group because drivers don’t offer the campaign contributions that the insurance industry and police associations do. And in Texas and California, I have been denied even access because I had made no contributions to their campaigns.
We know the answer. The problem is overcoming the political inertia fear and greed, driven by special interests, to actually use the scientific methodology.
What the heck is wrong with you people? Your own numbers speak against your movement! An 18% increase of fatal crashes and you want the DOT to do away with the increased fine amounts? Sounds like we need to make speeding a trip to jail. Like Hubert said, do the speed limit! The signs say “speed limit” not “speed minimum”. What’s the answer then? Just let everyone on the road figure out what speed they want to drive and just “Have Fun!”. Gesh!! Give me a break! If this website would offer a reasonable answer to solve the problem someone might listen to you. Instead you bitch, you’re what’s wrong with America today! I hope all of you get tickets!
One problem with construction zones these days is the fact that they hire people who don’t have a clue how to direct traffic. I have had several times where the person directing traffic has put me in an unsafe position because they can’t coordinate with the other person directing traffic at the other end of the construction zone. Or they put up cones which really confuse the driver and make manuvering them a mystery.
IMO The whole idea is to lower the speed limit even further to generate even more revenue.
In IL often work zone speed limits go up with no lane closures at all or a shoulder making up for a closed lane. The net result is that the flow of traffic is a little slower than normal but still over the usual 55mph speed limit. Except now the speed limit is 45mph. Following the work zone limit is risking one’s own life by becoming a speed bump. Trouble is the speed camera doesn’t care.
Also I’ve noticed that the the lay outs for construction zones have become a lot more slip shod and difficult to follow than in the past. Some things I’ve seen were just outright idiocy. It seems like with RLCs they make conditions more dangerous and hope ‘enforcement’ will make it safe.
One problem drives have in the USA is that they don’t pay attention to our laws. If the speed limit sign says 45 MPH….that is what it means. It don’t mean to drive 50 mph.If it says 60 mph, that is what is means. I travel the interstate and other highways every day. What do most people drive? 10 to 20 mph OVER the speed limit. We are a nation of law breakers. Today many people talk about illegal immigrates etc. If you drive over the posted speed limit, then you are breaking the law…just like the illegals. You are bresking the law.
Ever fudge on your taxes?
We all know by now that most trafic fines are , for makeing money, not safty. they take every opertunity to impound your car!!! guess why most of this hapens on the week end When they hook on to your car ,70.00 min. is charged right then , at least 20.00 per day is then added . the county then gets from .42to .50 percent of the total bill.
Alvin Roberson Said that
this is also true of drunk driving laws. the fact is sober drivers kill almost two thirds of all people in fatal accidents in america. drunk drivers kill one third. the fact is, madd has created a 3 billion dollar industry for the justice system. the number of fatal accidents as a whole hasn’t gone down, nor has the number of drunk driving fatalities. Now, that is not to say that people should dirve drunk, that is just to say that our justice system has accually become an adversaryal monetary system. Because in a justice system, one would rather let a guilty man free than convict the innocent.