Forget the safety course. Just impound the vehicle. Lawbreaking while driving will decrease dramatically.
13
I used to live in 2018 NYC and voted for DeBlasio but has has been a disappointment on transportation issues. He simply has prioritized the safety needs of NYC citizens. Hes put cars above people. I wish he had more of a backbone and would stand up for people for once.
5
There are people who won't change their behaviors despite numerous fines, a 90 min course and hearing about people who have been killed by drivers like them. They already know they should not be running red lights and speeding...telling them again is not going to make much of a difference is my guess.
What might make a difference is if the city put a 'Scarlet Letter' on both sides of their cars so their unsafe driving would be announced to everyone who sees the car. It could be removed after no further violations over 6 - 12 months. Embarrassment would likely go further to contain their bad driving 'habits'
15
“It’s unconstitutional. We should be allowed to face our accusers in court even for a traffic ticket,” which is complicated when the accuser is a camera, said Shelia Dunn, a spokeswoman for the National Motorists Association, an advocacy group that opposes traffic cameras. I think that would be great, if NYC could hire several thousand traffic officers who could man intersections twenty-four hours a day, 365 days a year, and never look away. However I think a speed camera is probably as accurate as an officer with a radar gun. Let's remember that driving is a privilege, not a right, and anyone with ten speeding violations should not have that privilege.
17
The basic human right of pedestrians and cyclists (and careful motorists) to enjoy safe passage on the public right of way without substantive risk of being killed at random should, in every case, be given precedence over the convenience and consumer preferences of the motorist who has myriad other transportation options. Instead, our laws and roads do precisely the opposite.
It is effectively legal to kill someone with a car. This is a travesty and must end.
16
So after multiple driving incidents and perhaps killing someone, New York will require you to take a driving safety course? Is this supposed to be a joke! You should never be allowed to have a driver’s license or drive in New York State if you are found guilty more than once of a DUI or reckless driving.
21
Good luck with this. I’d rather the NYS legislature look at this and possibly create a state law to deal with these violators. Definitely not the clueless NYC Council. And when the owner says it wasn’t him and he loans his car to friends and family members how do you say HE has to go or lose his car after he’s even paid all the fines? The police should issue personal service summonses to the actual drivers who are doing this are cited AND actually found guilty.
2
Five red-light violations???
Why on Earth would anyone with three or more red light violations in the same year have a license?
I think I got one once for not coming to a full stop before a legal turn on a red light. But that was on a bicycle and it was also about 30 years ago. I have probably missed a light a few times and cruised through shortly after a light turned red and I routinely fail to come to a full stop before legal right turns on a red light, but I've never been caught doing it. I'm not an excellent driver. I speed. But how many times do you have to run red lights to get two or more red-light tickets in the same year. Five is absurd.
And fifteen speeding citations are just as bad.
Were these rules drafted to avoid impact on cabbies who dive (badly) all day?
9
I got two speeding violations in the first three weeks of the new slower speed law -- on the same stretch of avenue -- because that stretch is a reprieve after a dangerously congested traffic circle; and, having been driving for almost 50 years, my foot "knew" how far down on the gas pedal the legal speed limit required it to go. That muscle habit was broken with the second ticket.
I am so pokey now, I feel like telling myself, "Get a horse! Get a horse!"
Arrest the guys who go 45-50 mph on my residential street, or along the broader avenues of Brooklyn, blasting music so loud they'd never know if they hit someone. Their aggressively reckless speeding is different from going 35-37 mph on a clear, relatively car-less stretch of a New York City Street.
8
Brilliant idea. We need more cameras, driving is a privilege not a right. I also feel strongly that bike people should have some sort of license. They too are habitual red light crossers. My mother was ran over by one a few years ago, ended up with a massive concussion.
10
In my long life I have driven many miles around the country (mostly not in cities). I have always been astonished by drivers' attitudes toward speed limits. Responsible adults speak of the "arrest speed" rather than the speed limit, and routinely drive 5-10 miles over the limit. Driving the speed limit as I do, I am told that I am a "dangerous driver" for not keeping up with the traffic flow. When the speed limit was lowered to 55, accidents and fuel use decreased, but there was a public outcry and it was raised. Somebody please explain to me what that is about?
8
I think we need a public service campaign by actors, similar to the one for designated drivers back in the 80s. So many movies now highlight really outrageous driving stunts, and it starts normalizing dangerous driving. Actors who play roles in those movies could do promos for safe driving, on the order of "I drive like that in the movies, but in real life I drive safely and follow the rules." They could be done in a humorous way to get attention without eye rolls. Make safe, considerate driving cool, instead of lame.
I also think we need much better driver's ed. Right now it's mostly just a formality, but it really ought to be taken much more seriously. For example, an initial driver's license would be valid for 6 months only, with required retesting, both a road test and a written exam, to get your permanent license. I just got a new license (I'm in my 50s) and all they did was ask if I wear glasses, and when I said "no" they didn't do a vision test. Very strange!
Your vision can deteriorate slowly over time without your being aware of it. And many people seem unaware of basic rules, like that a solid white line means you can't change lanes. I think there are lots of changes that could be made, but we need the impetus to get it done. Cars used improperly can easily become weapons, intentional or not.
9
@N equals 1
I felt dizzy just watching brief clips on the Oscar show from "Ford Versus Ferrari"!
The police should be on the look out for people who weave and change lanes without signaling.
6
15 speeding or 5 red light violations seems extremely lenient. And the consequence for such recklessness is a driver safety course. What a joke! These aggressive drivers should have their licenses suspended or even revoked for far fewer tickets.
10
So kill with a car and rehab?
Kill with a vehicle is just fine. Because death is meaningless is you die from an internal combustion engine?
Death is death and should be punished as such.
Someone kills you -- regardless of method -- is guilty of murder (choose the degree) or manslaughter (choose the degree) -- and should be jailed.
And let's be honest -- if they were driving they were helping to kill the planet for human habitation.
So, death for someone who was loved and death for the rest of us. Well done.
2
I agree. Many people are ignorant to the simple crosswalk laws.
Once a pedestrian enters the crosswalk, they have the right-a-way to cross the street. They are NOT required to hurry out of the way while they are on the phone walking in the crosswalk. All motorist/vehicles MUST STOP! Don't "assume," because they’re young they can "hurry" out-of-the-way, so you can "hurry" to your destination. If you hit a pedestrian while they are walking in the cross walk, you'll be charged. Worse, if a motorist kills a pedestrian, you'll likely be charged with manslaughter.
Let's not forget about the many stressful sleepless nights you'll endure after hitting someone with your car. You'll be beating yourself up for being in a "hurry" that day. Was it worth "hurrying" to your destination? Perhaps to watch your favorite show, eat your awaiting dinner, being late to pick up your child, etc..
3
In the case of speeding tickets reducing crime such as going through red lights and caught on camera, I am not certain that this was the main reason for their installation. It is a great revenue benefit for certain.
The city, in its' infinite wisdom reduced the speed on city streets to 25 miles from whatever it was before. There wasn't ample time to get used to it, and that's when the city racked up, and they had camera usage to back it up. Tickets were sent with photos of cars going through lights, and even if one was trying to maintain a speed it was too late to do so, but too bad, we gotcha! $50, please.Momentum pushed a lot of vehicles through those lights, but hey, cha ching!
Drivers who go through red lights and are spotted by the police while doing so are legitimate violators, and need to be counted as such, but these cameras are too sketchy to be a significant indicator of those who do not comply with the law.
1
15 and 5 speeding and red-light violations? Jeez, talk about letting folks off (or rather cars) far too easily.
3 and 2 would do it for me.
Fifty dollar fine? Is that a complete joke? Parking tickets in Los Angeles sometimes start at sixty five dollars, and I'm talking for going beyond the time limit for a metered space, not for illegal parking that blocks traffic or prevents street cleaning.
6
Driving is a privilege, not a right, and collectively, ALL drivers need to SLOW down...city driving is nerve wracking enough, but the distraction of cell phones and other attention grabbing devices have allowed us to not give the business of driving the thoughtful process it deserves.....We are sharing the road with an ever expanding array of alternative vehicles, and attention must be paid...slow down, use those mirrors and stay off the phone, folks...
7
Better yet, let’s just ban vehicle traffic in lower Manhattan, popular business districts in Brooklyn and Queens, and any other part of the city where ample public transit options exist. I gave up my car when I moved to New York, and I’ve never been happier. Driving is not a right and people in this city did just fine for hundreds of years before the advent of cars.
8
Before the advent of cars, Brooklyn was a lot smaller.
1
a better question is why speeding tickets are linked to the vehicle and not the driver? If a person is caught speeding or running a red fifteen times, their license should have been revoked ten tickets ago.
6
I don't drive quickly in NYC. We've educated pedestrians that "Cross at the Green, Not in Between" is wrong, and they own the road.
I had two close calls this weekend. Both times I was proceeding carefully and within the speed limit (recently lowered for your camera convenience) and the first person, at dusk, walked out between cars, in black, head to toe. It was almost funny how she didn't even make a cursory look. This was beaten by the pedestrian who crossed a highway on ramp in the Bronx, headphones in, and again didn't even make any glance around.
I eagerly await the NYC ads aimed at pedestrians to take some, any, responsibility for the situation..maybe update it to "Eyes up when you Cross", at the very least ?
5
It's more like “speed, speed, speed, speed, speed, violate, violate, violate, violate, violate, violate, violate, violate, violate, violate, violate, violate, violate, violate, violate.”
The way NYC prioritises cars and drivers above all other residents is an absolute disgrace.
8
Will speeders with money for lawyers be able to beat the rap in court?
3
I can’t wait for self-driving cars to eliminate speeders; drunks/substance-impaired; drivers distracted on phones, eating or putting on make-up; red light and stop sign runners; aggressive, impatient, discourteous or unconscientious drivers; etc.
We will see a dramatic decrease in traffic jams and arrive at our destinations less stressed and more on-time.
.
3
A few years ago, the City Of Seattle installed “red light” cameras, it wasn’t long before it became a revenue stream for the court system, and the company that makes, installs, and maintain the cameras. Red light cameras also cause accidents because people will slam on their brakes, to avoid getting a ticket. Red light cameras also send a ticket to the registered owner, for making a free right turn at a red light.
Any city that installs red light cameras the people need to be aware the cost vs benefit. Sometimes city’s do things that they claim are to protect pedestrians red light cameras for example, when really it’s just a money grab as it was in Seattle. The Citizens of Seattle forced the city to stop using red light cameras for the purposes of issuing traffic tickets, mainly because it does violate due process, traffic tickets are considered prema facie, (Latin for on its face) evidence until refuted. But how can you question a red light camera, you can’t.
How Seattleites forced the City of Seattle to back off, it’s was simple, instead of just paying the fine, people started asking for court dates to contest the camera. Sure the camera doesn’t lie, but that wasn’t the point. The point was, to fill the courts calendar with people contesting red light camera tickets. Judges would just do blanket dismissals, while a lawsuit asserting that red light camera violate due process wound its way through the courts. Red light cameras are a revenue stream plain and simple.
2
Excellent article. There will always be groups of people they resist progressive laws that are shown to save lives and I would like to see reporting on what causes people to ignore the data and see if we can do something about that. This theme is echoed all over the political scene today.
Also, the first two examples of dangerous drivers in the article were good but the third seemed to just be thrown in there like the reporter couldn’t find another solid example to make a strong case. If someone has 2 violations and causes the death of another person that alone may not be enough to say they were dangerous. Sure it might be sensible to make them take some remedial action like drivers ed but that is different using that as an example of a dangerous person who maybe should not be on the road.
8
@JH So how many people should a driver have to kill before the car goes gone?
4
My daughter was hit by a hit-and-run driver in Brooklyn in November. Luckily, she survived. If you don't think New York City has a problem, just google it. There are many problems with the system that need to be fixed. What is proposed here seems way to lenient and doesn't address some of the biggest issues. Read this for more on the issues that victims face: https://citylimits.org/2018/02/07/despite-nycs-vision-zero-progress-most-hit-and-run-drivers-avoid-arrest/
11
@BBK I don't think I can edit, so here is my correction: way too lenient.
3
My friend is going through the same scenario in NJ , 27 time arrested felon, suspended license , still on the road
7
And now NYS politicians are adding illegals to the driving public roster... let's see how much fun is that gonna be... Game of chicken is or rather dodge-a car is on... :))
Why not treat habitual speeding and traffic light violators the same way you treat drunk drivers.
Require them to have speed monitoring devices along with video recorders to insure that they are not speeding and running through red lights. This is much like the interlock devices that are put on cars to prevent convicted drunk driver from getting behind the wheel. Paying for such a system and the cost of having it monitored alone should be a deterrent to repeat offenders.
I know it is difficult to not have a car to make a living, but like a drunk driver, we give you a chance and you blow it, you loose your right to drive for a long time. Driving is a privilege, not a right.
8
And how will this development be affected by illegal aliens being given driver's licenses? Do they have the requisite English speaking skills to pass a driver's test and drive safely in the U.S.?
2
It's about time.
New York city is a pedestrian/cyclist dense driving environment. With so many vulnerable street users, the expectation, responsibility and aptitude of our drivers should absolutely be at a higher level. Why does everyone think the driving age here is 18 vs. 16 (or younger) practically everywhere else in the country??
If someone is too old to drive, is a chronic reckless driver, or has health issues that can make driving dangerous, then **they shouldn't be driving the streets of my city**.
The last I checked we have a pretty good public transit system, not to mention you can't walk 40 feet without seeing a taxi/Uber/Lyft for hire.
9
Sorry, but anyone who has racked up five red light tickets or 15 speeding tickets is not teachable. Having them attend a driving course will mean nothing to them. They are vehicular sociopaths
13
You mean like Jumaane Williams?
From a 2018 StreetsBlogNYC:
"The man who wants to be your next Public Advocate has been nabbed by school zone cameras 27 times."
“It’s too much,” said Nick Masters, 60, who lives in Far Rockaway, Queens. “This will just build another layer of resentment in our drivers that pushes people to leave the city.”
Good.
12
Yup. "Uh, buh-bye!"
9
"five red-light camera tickets or 15 speed-camera violations in a year" – isn't that a ridiculous underkill? How about requiring a safe-driving course, after a SECOND red-camera violation in a year?
10
I did not realize that individuals convicted of manslaughter and serving time in the gray bar hotel were allowed to have cars.
3
"The reckless driving initiative, which will begin as a three-year pilot, will require owners of vehicles that get five red-light camera tickets or 15 speed-camera violations in a year to complete a safety course to be developed by the city’s Department of Transportation. Drivers who fail to complete the course could lose their vehicles."
This is classic bureaucratic nonsense. *Fifteen* speeding violations, and then you just have to complete a safety course? That's like saying the punishment for fifteen violations for shooting your gun in the air in a crowd is a firearms safety course.
What a joke. Just another excuse to waste taxpayer money on that "course" that will no doubt cost millions of dollars to develop and implement.
5
Nick Masters' comment really blew my mind. Why would you want people who cannot follow the rules to stay in your city? There are consequences for not following the rules. The punishment should fit the crime. If you cannot use your car responsibly and correctly, you don't deserve to have it in the first place.
11
More speed and red light cameras are very good. But the worst of the lot of reckless drivers just buy a frame with extra wide black rubber borders to hid from the camera (the camera shoots from above, so the frame gets in the way of the photo). Or the bolder ones buy plastic photoblocking covers for the plates.
Does NYPD ticket these cars for that? Not that I've noticed.
4
Still far too lenient. Traffic deaths are murder. Cycling deaths are murder. Driving a car is a responsibility, a privilege, not a right. We take it for granted and it needs to stop. All I see, every single day here in the city, is horrendously dangerous driving. Most often it is taxis or trucks, usually it is young people. Driving home on a rainy night you can almost depend on two lunatics racing their cars through traffic on the BQE like they were in a video game. While riding my bike I see cement trucks, garbage trucks and box trucks run red lights going 45 mph on the same streets with white memorial bicycles chained to poles at the corner. It has to stop. I've never seen a cop miraculously appear and flash the perps to the side of the road to receive their summons. Usually I see the driver, completely unfazed, run across four lanes of Fourth Avenue traffic so they can turn ahead of the others waiting in line to turn right on Atlantic. Often it is school buses, careening around everyone in the middle of the intersection, right into the crosswalk enraging every driver who has waited patiently for their turn to go. What is it that keeps the police from policing? Why are there any number of cars double parked wherever I go, creating traffic jams and dangerous conditions? Why? Why? Why? New York seems like it is completely either unable or unwilling to do the work to make this a safe place to live. It's so frustrating.
7
We need better laws--laws that don't regard pedestrians and cyclists as subhuman. Automobiles are inherently deadly tools. Treat them that way. Negligence in using one should be criminal.
Five red light tickets? FIFTEEN speed violations? The very first one could have killed someone.
Apparently all you have to do to get away with murder in this country is own a car.
97
The most disturbing information in this article is speeding violations or running red lights are merely a $50 fine.
Anyone who has parked illegally in NYC knows those fines are higher. Sometimes exponentially so.
What are the priorities of legislators who place parking convenience over citizens' safety?
This is nuts.
71
@Laurence Bachmann
Those are the fines for **camera** speeding/red light tickets.
Tickets that are written by an actual NYPD officer are much, much higher. Like the $190 red light ticket I received years ago while riding my bicycle. And yes, contrary to popular opinion, the NYPD issues thousands of tickets a year to cyclists.
7
@Mikeweb
I understand how the tickets are written BUT the fine should be based on the degree of offense NOT based on whether it is digitally or manually applied.
It is NUTS to fine somebody who parks illegally 3x the amount of somebody who runs a red light and risks human life.
12
Take a safety course? Is the City really serious about cutting fatalities, or is this just a joke?
I live in Park Slope, and I have learned to pause, look both ways, and then look again before crossing the street. Daily, drivers speed through red lights with impunity. The day after the two children were killed on 9th Street, I was almost hit by a driver speeding through a red light at that same intersection.
A safety course is useless. If these drivers were concerned about safety, they wouldn't speed through red lights. Fine them large amount of money. Take away their drivers' licenses for 6 months. Cancel their vehicle registration, and demand that the drivers turn in their license plates. And if the drivers don't comply, jail them.
That's what you do when you are really serious about pedestrian fatalities.
9
I live in the neighborhood with that photo. I walked past the debris of that accident. Di Blasio regularly passes that intersection to go to our YMCA. The simple solution for this intersection, a designated turn signal. That’s it. A block further west on 4th avenue it has a dedicated turn signal, and though a larger street there are many less accidents. On 5th Avenue cars have to navigate a turn without that signal and pedestrians get caught in the crossfire.
4
License revocation through red light camera infractions is one thing but do we trust any police department to issue speeding tickets without bias?
Is there not something wrong with NYC politicians accepting drivers to exceed the speed limit of 25mph by 10mph, officially allowing everyone to drive at 35mph, accepting a tripling of the fatal, and a doubling of serious pedestrian injuries? How can it be that a speeding violation and a red-light violation carries only a $50 fine? Why is everything that is being done in NYC reactive, why is there zero insight into established scientific consensus on what is universally recognized to be efficacious with regard to road traffic safety in any civilized country of the planet? The fact that we have only a sprinkling of speed cameras in school zones and even there fail to protect children and pedestrians by allowing drivers to drive 35mph is an embarrassment and an insult to all those already killed and injured due to past failures to act, given the slaughter on our streets.
3
@fahrrad
To answer your question, because government is reactive not proactive, but red light cameras violate due process. Since traffic tickets are considered prima facie evidence. That means that “on its face” your guilty of running a red light, until refuted by you, that ticket whether mailed or issued by police officer is considered evidence of a traffic violation. And under due process you have the right to question the officer that issued you your traffic ticket. They used those in Seattle, but not anymore, everyone that got a ticket, asked for s court date, filling the courts calendars.
How about any person with two moving violations needs to take a remedial class. Also, the must renew their license with a driving test within the next 12 months.
After all, this woman would not have tripped the wire on the new law.
6
Where is the crackdown on bicyclists too? Too many of them still don't stop at red lights and go the wrong way on one-way streets, and don't have lights on at night.
7
@Reva Cooper NYPD frequently tickets cyclists for all sorts of things. Up until a year or two ago NYPD would ticket unconscious cyclists after collisions (yet in cases like those referenced in the article it takes a public outcry to ticket drivers). I would rather see NYPD ticket more cops, sanitation workers, and drivers who are in the bike lane, forcing cyclists into the street. NYC is also in the process of changing the laws so that cyclists get headstarts in intersections like pedestrians.
5
@Reva Cooper no worries there, Reva, I got 2 tickets the other day, courtesy of NYPD, one for not using a bike lane (which was a bit out of my way), and one for not having a life-saving bell on my bike (while I did not get any bonus points for using a light, despite riding in daylight hours). This proactive ticketing action by NYPD doubtlessly promoted traffic safety immeasurably and as a result, we are all safer for it.
3
@Reva Cooper How often do they kill or injure others in comparison to cars? Such a tired argument.
3
This law is not only absurd, it is outright unconstitutional. And this is because it allows that the state cannot even assess points on a license, let alone revoke a license without proof that the license holder commited the violations. And the fact that the license holder cannot produce another driver that accepts that they were the driver is not considered proof the license holder was the driver. And this is despite the fact that driving is a privilege and there is no right to drive.
However the constitution does provide that a person cannot be deprived of property without due process of the law. And so. And so to confiscate a person's vehicle based on the fact that its owner is a dangerous driver with no proof is a violation of the constitution.
It would make allot more sense, in addition to withstanding legal scrutiny, to revoke both the plates and the registration. With NYPD patrol cars operating automatic license readers a car with revoked plates with not manage to remain on the road for even a day.
1
From a market-perspective, the current situation is not working so the disincentive must be increased. I support the priority of increasing fines for multiple offenders of the more dangerous violations. Key discussion topics would be defining multiple and dangerous, but law enforcement data and personnel fwould be very helpful with those decisions.
2
Fines don’t work , some people will drive anyway
@Bill Lombard
From a market perspective, increasing fines will dissuade more people, but certainly not all.
If you accumulate 15 speeding tickets in a year, you shouldn’t even have a license anymore. I’d bet that most people get less than 10 in their life, including fix-it tickets. 15 in a year, that’s insane.
29
I think that this proposal doesn't go far enough. Some of the most appalling driving I see is on the FDR, BQE, and West Side Highway, where people evidently think that they're living in a video game as they dodge between cars at 20 mph faster than average traffic. Except that they're not, and accidents happen far too frequently.
I can't wait until autonomous driving is standard. Far fewer people will be injured or die, our insurance rates will go way down, and city residents will save countless hours no longer sitting in traffic jams.
In the meantime, yes, install more speedcams and red light cams and stop the carnage on pedestrians and cyclists. I say this as a pedestrian, a driver, and a cyclist.
9
Along with increased crackdowns on aggressive/dangerous drivers (of which there are many in NYC—all one need do is walk, drive, or bike in this town to witness it), there also need to be major traffic revisions on our streets. In my neighborhood, the streets are so narrow in most places that they can barely accommodate two-way driving. They should ALL be re-zoned as one-way, helping to avoid collisions with other moving vehicles, pedestrians, and parked cars. Also, the ease in traffic flow will help those among us whose frustration at narrow streets builds into dangerous/reckless driving habits, or so one would hope. (But mostly, NYC drivers are a clueless lot with little regard for lanes, lights, people, or signage, and it's the main reason I don't want my kids walking home from school by themselves....)
7
Bravo NYC Council. I like this approach that hold people accountable above and beyond fines. Other cities and states need to follow.
7
The super wealthy, who are just laugh off the fines from multiple tickets, will just go out and buy another car.
1
@John Mardinly
Maybe so, but there aren't that many super wealthy driving around. Most of the culprits are 99-percenters.
2
The roll-out of red light & speeding cameras in many municipalities was a cash grab disguised as a safety measure. The movement lost all credibility when it was shown that some cities, including my own Chicago, shortened the length of yellow lights to increase revenues.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-yellow-light-standard-change-20141010-story.html
Cities should start with enforcing "don't block the box" regulations during rush hour. Enforcement of those laws will send the message to drivers not to drive aggressively. Benefits will be traffic will move better and buses won't be stuck at intersections for multiple cycles.
1
There are so many alternatives to cars, especially within Manhattan, but in all of New York as well. Cars should be banned from Manhattan, exceptions made by means of special application. Cars should be excluded from large swaths of the other boroughs as well-with the exception of Staten Island-with local shuttles provided provided where necessary. Anyone who is involved in a fatal accident, should have their license suspended for at least six months, pending a thorough investigation, in the manner of a policeman placed on leave after a shooting. Repeat offenders, speeding violations and speeding, should have their licenses confiscated for a year. The automobile within New York City is not the absolute necessity it once was. As thing stand now, if you want to get away with murder, just run someone over and blame them for it.
4
People are allowed to drive with suspended licenses and regularly get arrested in NY and NJ with no real consequences. The NYT should do a study and expose on how much of a free for all the roads are around the whole metropolitan area are. Suspended drivers are out on the road everyday, I personally know someone who is going through a ordeal because of a suspended driver. It’s a lot more common than you think. More people are not hurt or killed just out of sheer Providence.
4
Wow, another piece of stupid, worthless legislation from the city council. They are just freaking out that the Vision Zero program is not working as they thought it would so they are grasping at straws. The red light cameras and speed cameras do NOT capture who is driving the car. This just penalizes the car owner. How about speed enforcement through the police - that will result in moving violations for the actual driver. There already are laws in place that punish the driver that racks up too many moving violations. Try more of that!
1
@Elaine this program would penalize the car's owner unless they identified the driver. It doesn't seem like it would be that difficult (for example) to determine which member of a household was driving a car, since the times and dates of the violation are available. You shouldn't loan your car to people you don't trust.
4
William Randolph Hearst would be proud of the author...a person with "two speeding tickets crushed a ...messenger". Are you kidding? "Let he or she who is without sin...", and so forth.
If people resent losing their license or car and leave the city.......good riddance. Fifteen speeding violations is WAY too many. Addiction to selfish speed should be flagged at 5 instead. A school bus going through a red light (not in NY) killed my sister 24 years ago, leaving her two year old motherless. Please put cameras anywhere possible.
16
The NYPD should arrest drivers who commit manslaughter instead of just letting them off.
8
Cool, now imagine this discussion with guns
8
knowledge is not the cure for this type of behavior
1
A car? She shouldn't even have a life outside a prison cell.
6
@ben The drive in question took her own life shortly after the accident.
@ben Which ''she''
Why did you quote the NMA? They are a nonsense alt-car pseudo organization that thinks AAA has gone soft. They are fact averse, and don't deserve to have their voice amplified.
6
@Leonard Bonarek Oh. okay.
Taking away cars is excessively punitive? But it's okay for these drunk drivers and reckless drivers to take away people's lives?
20
@Martha Shelley
I should add that my wife and I were walking across the street when a young woman with a suspended license hit us. We had the light. She was texting. We were incredibly lucky--still alive, no brain injuries, no spinal cord injuries. But we could easily have been killed. The driver got a ticket. We still have residuals from the surgeries.
5
Many drivers are incredibly entitled, completely oblivious of anyone around them. Why for instance, honk the horn just because you’re being held up a few seconds. It’s annoying to everyone around. Can anyone imagine a pedestrian bringing up a similar horn if they are held up by a car parking on the crosswalk?
14
First, this is an issue regarding which New Yorkers have the greatest credibility. New York is often a model for national policies, and we all have a vested interest in traffic safety, but non-residents should tread lightly here. That said, I'm surprised current law is not more stringent. If a motorist gets three speeding tickets or runs three red lights, why isn't his or her license suspended for three to six months--on top of a hefty fine? If there are further violations, suspend the license for a year and increase the fine. And if there are even more violations, that's it; you never drive again. It's not as if the city lacks for public transportation. I applaud the new initiative, though it seems modest and restrained. I'd simply urge sterner consequences at an earlier stage. There's a clear public safety benefit to cracking down on reckless driving--which also has implications for the costs associated with deploying ambulances and treating accident victims, to say nothing of the heightened rates of insurance faced by all drivers for the bad behavior of a few. But consider as well that driving behavior is a good indicator of behavioral trends off-road, too. Someone self-centered and impulsive enough to repeatedly drive in a manner that puts the innocent at risk is likely to display the same selfishness and stupidity in everyday life. Limiting such people's mobility, and imposing a meaningful consequence for their actions, may have knock-on benefits it's hard to quantify.
2
Owners of the cars getting these violations have to be punished? Thanks, not.
Have you never heard of teenagers? Have you no idea that teens (and older offspring) frequently drive cars that belong to their parents?
@Margo Should the parents of these teenagers not teach them safe driving habits? If my teen got a ticket, that would be it - no more driving privileges with my car.
11
@Margo did you read the article?
"Under the city’s plan, owners of vehicles would have to take a safety course unless somebody else was driving when the tickets were issued and agrees to take the class."
If you're letting a teen drive your car, you should make sure they're aware of the consequences of their bad driving.
3
@Mari What does that have to do with punishing or not punishing the parents /
In my opinion traffic violations should be doubled inside cities. Especially in a place like New York where there are so many options. The degree to which the United States is addicted to the automobile is already astounding; it’s 100 times more astounding in a large city like New York.
It is time for big changes that cause big complaints among motorists.
151
@S
MOST of New York City does NOT have ready access to mass transit.
A trip via subway to midtown Manhattan from my house is an hour and a half to two hours. By car, during the rush hour, it is generally under an hour!
1
Driving is a privilege, not a right. Someone who has that many speeding and/or red light violations should no longer enjoy the privilege of driving until they've taken remedial courses and should have their license suspended. I'm not really following the "layer of resentment" comment - resentful that you have to follow traffic laws? Can't run red lights or stop signs? Can't speed? In my neighborhood I routinely see speeding, running red lights, running stop signs, blasting through crosswalks while pedestrians are in them (i.e. apparently nobody understands the NY state law of pedestrians having right of way). And yes, the cops do need to do their jobs and ticket these drivers.
282
@Christine
"Driving is a privilege, not a right."
Precisely, Christine.
Also, Traffic violations are not crimes (or these people would be sent to prison) so there is no "right to face your accuser."
"Speed guns" are used everywhere to determine if a car or truck is going too fast. Why shouldn't the instrument be built into a camera?
It's past time to crack down on this dangerous lot.
25
@Christine All those thing you see, " In my neighborhood I routinely see speeding, running red lights, running stop signs, blasting through crosswalks while pedestrians are in them", are you talking about automobiles, or bikers. I was almost injured by a biker two months ago, flying down Queens Blvd in the wrong direction through an intersection the wrong way. He missed me by a hair, I had a walk white hand in the crosswalk, and as he blew past the intersection the wrong way at 18 MPH, he looked back at me and flipped me the you know what. I think our emphasis that it's only the auto or truck who is responsible in bicycle collisions has given a certain level of hubris to bikers who also routinely flout the law. And since none of them are required to have insurance, when you get hit and injured by one of them, you have no recourse.
10
@seatreets bicyclists are already ticketed at a higher rate than trucks. Yet trucks cause significantly more injuries and deaths. The NYPD admitted this in a recent city council hearing.
14
Anyone can pass a safety course. That doesn’t mean they will drive more safely. Why not just take the vehicle or license immediately? And why wait for 15 speeding tickets? These people have already been receiving tickets and have chosen to continue their dangerous behavior regardless.
184
@Rob This. Especially in a city like New York where there's easy access to public transit.
40
ah yes, drive at 36 mph on a wide boulevard? get your car taken away! the epitome of fairness and equity according to our resident transit advocates!
2
@circleofconfusion
That is NOT TRUE.
Clearly you have not seen most of New York City where mass transit is more the exception than the rule.
Taking away the licences of people who drive dangerously is a great idea.
Its time to be get honest about how Vision Zero has been a recipe for failure and should be scraped. Vision Zero has made our streets "appear" safer, even though they really or not (otherwise traffic deaths would not be "spiking"").
It is better to have a three lane street that looks too dangerous to j-walk on than a one lane street that looks like a pedestrian might make it in time.
End Vision Zero, and save lives now!
Hundreds of suspended drivers on the road with no real punishment or consequence to them. Taking a license away doesn’t stop some from continuing driving. A fine won’t stop them.
2
There seems to be a number of vehicle operators who believe that they are entitled to break the law. Many of them say this because they say they are good drivers and therefore warrant this special right.
However I believe a good driver is someone who obeys the law. The people who break the law are very very bad drivers and put everyone at risk. Getting those drivers off the road saves lives and I don’t know why this should be a problem.
7
Drivers are exasperated by having to stop and go and go and stop for red lights, double parked vehicles, deliveries trucks, school buses, people looking at their cellphones as they cross the street, cyclists, and worst of all, the fact that there are so darned many other drivers on the road. I see drivers go into fits at congested intersections all the time. It takes 10 minutes to drive five blocks from Bedford Avenue to Nostrand Avenue in Brooklyn along Avenue I and the drivers just lose it. Theses are not your red light runners or chicken playing speeders. But they become homicidal manics because there are just too many cars in front of them. Cars have invaded our public life to the point that they've declared war on life.
16
@Max Shapiro You think there are just too many. So which cars must we get rid of ----
@kenneth
Every building, stadium, concert hall, and theater within the city posts what the maximum capacity is. The streets are public places that are subject to the same capacity concerns. If motorists want to use the space, let them pay a road and parking tax. Or, if we can't agree on who should pay and how much, well, let's just let the law of the jungle prevail and add a little to the Second Amendment. Your right to drive ends where my behind begins.
2
How did NYC get around the argument that violators cannot face their accusers, the speed camera? That put an end to them in Atlanta.
1
@Ryan Bingham
A license is not a right it is a privilege. The rules to obtain one are established by the state of NY. Finally, traffic violations are not criminal offenses. Nobody's being charge with a crime.
If you were being charged with vehicular homicide you would have a right to face an accuser.
1
@Ryan Bingham The accuser would be the state, the prosecutor. The red light camera/speed camera would be the evidence upon which the accusation is based. If worst came to worst, just stick somebody under the cameras paying them minimum wage. There, we have an real life physical accuser. 'Yes your honour, I was there. The car was going very fast. The camera measured the speed and it was x-miles per hour, y-miles over the speed limit.'
1
Why are we so lax on these crimes against humanity? You run a stop sign, you get the electric chair. We are quarantining cities and nations over 800 coronavirus deaths, when automobile accidents kill 35,000 annually in the US alone. And we do nothing about severe speeding and reckless driving. On my drive home tonight, I will see at least 10 stop signs ignored and 25 speeding cars. Start writing those tickets, officers.
12
"The ... initiative, which will begin as a three-year pilot, will require owners of vehicles that get five red-light camera tickets or 15 speed-camera violations in a year to complete a safety course.... Drivers who fail to complete the course could lose their vehicles."
Nonsense. Anyone getting half as many tickets or violations should lose his license, period (and maybe forever). There is no excuse for allowing so dangerous a person to drive. Does anyone believe that attending driver school will deter for a second so selfish a person?
With disgust--Harriet
13
Speeding and red light tickets have a fee of only $50? Did I read that right?? Why even bother!
Drivers' rights and anti-camera laws are ridiculous. We should do everything possible to protect pedestrians and other drivers from the reckless repeat offenders.
13
@Laura Jumping the turnstile is a $100 fine. Speeding tickets should be more.
Please take their cars away. Driving aggressively is an act of violence.
1
Put repeat violators in jail for 30 days, period.
6
This is all part of the Democrat push to overlook "minor" issues like shoplifting, public urination, loitering, fare jumping and it now extend to other things, like moving violations. That way the politicians can claim that crime is down, if you don't arrest people who used to be locked up, no record is created and no statistic is generated. Viola, crime is down, that was easy. Just like all politicians to kick the can down the road, while basking in the glow of lower crime. The problem is that sooner or later the public stops believing their leaders, when they see reality for what it is. The truth will eventually come out and that's when change can happen.
2
“It’s too much,” said Nick Masters, 60, who lives in Far Rockaway, Queens. “This will just build another layer of resentment in our drivers that pushes people to leave the city.”
Then please do use all a favor and leave.
23
Dear New York City
Have you thought of adopting no car zones in the city like countless European cities have done? Makes for a very calming environment in every respect. How about investing more in your dilapidated public transit system that is just shameful for America's largest city. Why not take advantage of today's very low interest rates and finance yourselves a city ready to face the future.
92
@Roberto we’re working on it. They just passed a major $51 billion capital spending plan for the next 5 years that will make substantial upgrades to the buses and subways. The city also passed a “streets master plan” bill that, among other things, requires 250 miles of additional protected bike lanes and 150 miles of additional protected bus lanes over the next 5 years, plus 1 million square feet of pedestrian space to be taken from cars and given over to pedestrians over the next 2 years.
1
@Mike
Anyone who gives the MTA a nickel is a fool.
How many BILLIONS of dollars did they make disappear renovating 2 Broadway?
Best case, they expect to spend 4-5 times what any other agency would for the same job, in NYC.
@Roberto I have difficulty walking. If you have no car zones, buses or some other means of transportation will be needed. Maybe little trolleys or even motorized wheel chairs to be rented as needed? Paths for them would have to be provided.
“It’s unconstitutional. We should be allowed to face our accusers in court even for a traffic ticket,” which is complicated when the accuser is a camera....
Oh, for heaven's sake! The accuser is not a camera. The camera provides the evidence.
And yes, a venue for challenging that evidence must be provided. No doubt there will be a few mixups and a very few reasons for leniency. But unconstitutional? I think not.
19
@Eileen Expat I got caught in one of those red light cameras once. It was late at night but it got a remarkably good picture of me at the wheel. There was no denying it was me.
I've known a few people in my lifetime who killed someone with their automobiles. One individual was a pedestrian, one was on a bicycle, and the third was a person sitting in the back seat when their car was rear ended. In each case, the driver was so extremely distraught with guilt and remorse, they never drove again.
I would think grief and guilt of causing another's death by operating an automobile would be so devastating, the driver would not want to get behind the wheel ever again, rather than the city or state taking one's car away from them.
3
@Marge Keller I believe the idea is to take the car away / provide training before such tragedies would occur; the remorse felt by these individuals does nothing to help grieving families or bring their loved ones back.
11
While I do feel older people may pose a serious risk to pedestrians and other drivers, we simply can't enforce punitive programs without taking into consideration younger drivers who also pose a risk to our safety.
Speaking from experience: a young kid, about 18 years old, was texting as he turned the corner in front of my house. He was going too fast and was distracted by his phone. He smashed into a tree outside my front door. The crash was deafening and I was seated at my desk inside the house, exactly where I would have been impacted had the tree not suffered in my place.
All around me, I see kids on their phones and speeding, going through red lights and speeding behind drivers who are pulling out of parking spaces. Please, let's pay attention to these kids, as well as older drivers.
The penalties for distracted driving must be more egregious. It's the only way we can tame this beast.
20
@Pamela L. ... or how about making cars a virtual cellular 'dead zone' ... it's technologically possible, but people care more about their phones than other's safety. Increasing fines is a dead-end, otherwise we would have no murders, right?
3
@Pamela L. Where I'm from they just increased the fine for use of a mobile phone while driving to $1000 (US$700). We also have a points system for driving infraction. Each offense carries a certain number of points. Get too many points during a certain period and your license will be suspended and you may also need to go to court. Even so, we have a major problem with entitled drivers who resent being caught doing to wrong thing or don't think what they are doing is wrong.
As an anecdote, just a few days ago I was cycling when a driver, aged in their 40s, drives at speed up the exit from the carpark. I am crossing the footpath. I have right of way but due to the speed he was doing he has to slam on the brakes. He then abuses me, puts the park brake on, and gets out of the vehicle and makes threats of violence. I thought he was going to try and beat the living daylights out of me.
Unfortunately many people have no idea what the road rules are and many car drivers believe that, because their vehicles can kill others whilst leaving themselves unharmed, everybody else needs to get out of their way or suffer the consequences. Perhaps we need to bring back the red flag laws of days gone by.
2
If we are going to have enforcement, perhaps it should strat with operators of government vehicles.
Bus routes laid out to require violations of the law (M 79 at 79 St. and York Av,),
Bus drivers walking through red lights and stopping 3 feet from the curb.
FDNY ambulances blinding drivers.
City officials, starting with the mayor, using lights and sirens when there is no emergency and ignoring all traffic rules.
And let's not talk about parking. And official placards. I can't find anything in the Vehicle and Traffic Law that allows issuance of placards or other permits to violate parking regulations.
Why do judges and elected officials get special plates that allow them to ignore the law?
How about a lawsuit saying that the general public is denied equal protection of the laws by how they are enforced?
8
"Driving is a privileged, not a right." So is eating. There is no right to eat in the Constitution. But let's be serious.
IF the city is serious about traffic law enforcement, let's see the District Attorneys prosecute violations of Section 1680 of the STATE Vehicle and Traffic Law. That makes it a violation to install traffic control devices that FAIL to meet the requirements of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. And quite a few of the signs, pavement markings, and traffic signals fail to meet MUTCD requirements.
And while we're at it, how about some prosecutions for violation of Article 145 of the Education Law? The Education Law makes it a felony to perform engineering work without a Professional Engineer's license. But Polly Trottenberg has a whole department of city planners, operating under Eric Beaton, who perform engineering work without PE licenses. The procedure is that the city planners decide about the traffic engineering and then order an engineer to sign the plans.
How many of the red light cameras are legal? The law requires a 3.0 second yellow at 25 mph and a 3.2 second yellow at 30 mph on a straight, level road. For many years it was city policy not to comply.
When the city starts to obey the law there will be plenty of time to start enforcement against the public.
And when it comes to enforcement, why is the conviction rate in the PVB and state Traffic hearings many times higher than it was when cases were heard in court?
4
@Eugene ''there is no right to eat in the Constitution.''
Gee, that's cute.
1
Targeting repeat offenders is of course a good thing.
But the greater problem is the growing laxness in even citing traffic violations.
It started years ago when everyone stopped signaling -- first for changing lanes and later when making turns. Law enforcement turned a blind eye to such failures to signal.
Now one regularly sees drivers blowing through stop signs and racing yellow lights to the point that running red lights is no longer a rare occurance.
Add to that traffic agents in Manhattan more focused on moving cars than protecting pedestrians (yes, this is apparently a regular NYPD traffic "strategy" at East 34th and Second Ave.*) and it's no wonder folks are getting run over.
Pedestrians and cyclists are now apparently considered "fair game" for motorists throughout New York City.
*No kidding. The other day (mid morning) at this intersection the supervising traffic agent told another to wave cars though the intersection even after the light had changed. Thus endangering pedestrians who were starting to cross with the light in their favor. She was more interested in moving cars than protecting pedestrians. So much for Vision Zero!
10
@George
Speaking of East 34th & 2nd, I witnessed a traffic cop there motioning for a car to proceed directly into an elderly woman who was unable to get across the street before the light changed. Fortunately the driver had more sense than the cop and gave the pedestrian the right-of-way. The police and the DOT definitely care more about cars than about pedestrians.
4
"Now, the city is planning to take an aggressive step aimed at thousands of the most dangerous drivers — requiring people who rack up multiple speeding or red-light camera violations to take a driving-safety course or risk the seizure of their vehicles."
Oh, yeah. That's real "aggressive."
I haven't visited the"Center of Western Civilization" in 5 years. Trying to cross at an intersection when I had a "walk" light was a horror show: endless streams of cars trying to"beat" the light or make that turn despite having a pedestrian right of way was bad then. I'm sure today it's even worse.
Unfortunately, this is beyond schadenfreude when two little kids are killed.
8
@george eliot I agree, it doesn't sound very aggressive to me. What I got from the article is that if a car was caught via speed camera doing at least 35mph or more in a 25, FIFTEEN times, then the owner would have to go to traffic school. That sounds like lunacy to me, I am all for that type of driving resulting in a suspended license, and revoked registration for the car. 15 times!? It clearly says in the article that the driver who hit the kids and killed them "only" had 8 violations for speeding AND running lights.
7
@george eliot
And what is the city's legal authority?
@george eliot Have you offered any suggestions?
"Others say the cameras infringe on the rights of drivers.
'It’s unconstitutional. We should be allowed to face our accusers in court even for a traffic ticket,' "
This is representative of how delusional car drivers are. There is no right to drive, nor a right to allow your property to be used in a dangerous manner. You own your car - you have responsibility for it, and for who uses it. Any other approach facilitates the culture of impunity that exists for car drivers, and allows for complete abdication of responsibility for traffic danger.
18
@sjwalker
Absolutely.
We shouldn't allow any person accused of doing something wrong to face his or her accuser.
We need to reestablish the concept of "limit" in speed limits. The 10 mph rule means a ticket only if a driver is driving 40% over the limit on most NYC streets. See the research on the incremental maiming and death that accompany each additional mph in a crash.
6
We, as a society, have tremendous ambivalence toward traffic safety. Nobody wants accidents, but efforts to enforce existing laws are often met with ferocious opposition, apparently because people feel like they are very good drivers and should be allowed to drive as fast at they want without fear of punishment. Most drivers speed, at least on highways, when they get the chance. People roll through stop signs. They don't stop at all when making a right turn on a red light. In NYC a significant number of drivers don't use turn signals, and they routinely make turns from the wrong lane. Why do so many otherwise law abiding people feel justified in flouting traffic laws as long as they can get away with it?
17
Even the proposed changes are nowhere near enough.
- Make red light & speeding tickets $500 each, not $50.
- Make DUI's a $1000 fine.
- Suspend the license on the second offense, and revoke the license and impound the vehicle on the third offense.
- Make driving without a license a $5000 fine.
Right now the problem is that the penalties for driving offenses are too low to act as an effective deterrent.
That's the problem...
30
They penalty for DWI is already far more than $1000. Or, were you proposing reducing the penalty?
3
When a driver injures or kills someone, the car is as good as a gun. I cannot understand why vehicular deaths are not treated like homicide and/or manslaughter. Taking the car away is just the first step. Taking a safety class is not the best way to treat repeat offenders. The best way is to make sure there are no repeats by not waiting for the 10th or 3rd or 4th.
31
Add not using turn signals when turning to the list of bad driving habits.
18
In the UK we have a points system - accumulating 12 points leads to a driving ban. Low grade speeding and red light offences get you 3 points. By law, the owner of a car must name the driver. Using a mobile phone gets you 6 points. All offences also have fines. There are options for speed/safety courses instead of points but you can only do one every 3 years.
28
@Mark, UK Brazil has a similar system. A recent lowering of speed limits in São Paulo (5 million registered cars) and the installation of thousands of speed cameras with serious penalties cut the crash rate by about 30% in a year. And counterintuitively, average traffic speeds rose even as peak speeds dropped, due to fewer crashes, less sudden braking, less clumping at lights. Traffic now moves both more smoothly and more safely. New York is way behind.
9
@Mark, UK
A lot of the US uses a similar system. Most Americans would find the idea outlined here, for NYC, being able to accrue 15 speeding violations before going to traffic school insane. For example:
"If you receive four or more moving violations within a one-year period in Texas, your license will be suspended. Further, seven or more violations within a two-year period result in license suspension."
5
@Mark, UK we have a point system here as well. A red light or speeding ticket issued by a cop does amount to points on your license. Unfortunately red light and speed cameras don’t amount to points on your license.
2
If NYC is serious about enforcing traffic laws, then a drivers' ed course for 10 red light infractions is far too light a response. Take the car away. Red light violations - like the one on Coney Island Avenue a few months back - are virtually impossible to protect against. The city needs to begin enforcing traffic rules in a very serious manner or the path to becoming a third world-style city will be irreversible.
25
I use Waze which sometimes lets me know if there is a red light camera ahead. I never run red lights and brake immediately when it's yellow, but I can say that when driving in NYC you're often stuck in the "box". If you drive like a normal person should, i.e. stop before the box when there's congestion the locals go crazy. I have to wonder how many red light violations is over people just feeling forced to stay in the line of stopped traffic. What I'd like to see them incorporate in NYC and elsewhere are horn sensing red light cameras like they did in India. The more you honk, the longer it takes the red light to turn green. Horns don't have to be the soundtrack of the city.
12
@DeMossMD Love that suggestion about horn sensing red light cameras ... taking longer to turn green. Hadn't heard of that one.
2
@DeMossMD A long time ago, I got a ticket for being in the "box" because I didn't enter it until it was clear and the guy behind me was honking and honking so I moved ahead slowly only yo be caught by the guy in front of me stopping short and not edging forward enough for me to clear. He saw it, but he saw the cop too coming towards me. Not the best day for the cop so I got tagged. That said, now I become deaf to those behind me if I don't have a clear exit out of the box.
2
Making ruthless or erratic drivers attend a “safe driving” course is entirely toothless. An escalating series of real punishments seems appropriate.
Further, not all humans possess the physical and intellectual skills to drive. Perhaps a practical test of vision, reflexes and simulated driving situations should be applied too.....
13
Anyone caught driving with multiple existing violations should have their vehicle confiscated and impounded, on the spot. Vehicles are deadly weapons when helmed by lawless drivers.
33
"But speeding and red-light camera tickets are tied to the vehicle, not the driver, so violations caught on camera do not count toward an individual’s license record."
I think I found your problem New York. Vehicles don't speed and run red lights, drivers do. Why don't you fix this giant bug in your system?
7
@Steve
Because we have rights under the law in this country.
If there were real penalties, the driver would have the right to confront his / her accuser and that would increase costs dramatically. Also, eventually a case would come to court and demonstrate that the traffic control devices were unlawful, as most are.
@Steve Wrong. They take a picture of the car and the driver from a separate camera.
1
@Steve Hand grenades don't kill. People with hand grenades do.
Does the Columbia Journalism review still have a section called The Lower Case for headlines that don't say what they think they do? Like "Squad helps dog bite victim" or "Red tape holds up bridge"? If so, the headline on this story deserves to be there: She ran over and killed two children. Should she have had a car? I don't think you meant to say that she ran over on foot and killed two children and that things would somehow be different if she had had a car, but that's what it sounds like.
8
Seems pretty lenient to me. $50 fines? 15 fines before taking a coarse? You have to be driving like a lunatic to hit that threshold.
17
I say to Nick Masters, sir, if you accumulate enough violations to trigger the test then NY is better you’re gone
11
@Dave k Who is Nick Masters
I'd grab the wheels right out from under these blatant repeat offenders. But then the problems start. The weeping wife showing up in court saying she needs the car to take the kids to the doctor. The husband saying the car is half his and he didn't do anything wrong. And the people who buy one junker after another and drive their wrecks without insurance, figuring losing a few hundred bucks isn't as bad as taking the bus.
There's no solution for stupid, and the intentional law-breakers just get better at playing the system. Meanwhile, people are maimed or die.
12
@KJ
In Rockaway, we've had deaths from old age while people waited for the bus to take them from one end to the other.
4
@Eugene huh ?
@Eugene
Touché.
Why are cars even allowed to take turns while pedestrians have a walk signal? A walk signal signifies that its safe to cross, not that you need to look in every direction to make sure its safe - its harder to see a car taking a turn onto the street you're crossing than it is to see traffic on that street.
14
@Elise Works in SF
@Donal Why does it matter where Elise works?
I am not originally from NYC and I love to drive, but I do not own a car here because:
Cars pollute the air
They clog the streets
They're loud
And they are dangerous - to pedestrians, to cyclists and to the occupants of the car when the driver is under the influence
We don't need to have so many cars on the streets - period. I support anything that will reduce their impact on the city.
17
@A.H. I am not from nyc and love to drive but do not own a car because....honestly, I just can't afford one.
I read that in my state 40% of drivers involved in accidents are driving without a license. We’ve just had 3 young people killed in a car accident in which the driver was an unlicensed 16 year old. I think taking their cars if they don’t take the training is a very strong incentive to straighten up.
I have always thought that if someone has more than one drunk driving conviction that their car should be impounded. When you take away their license they just drive without one. We need tougher action.
24
Straighten up? If you run 5 lights or are issued 15 speeding tickets in one year, you are extremely reckless and pose a danger to the public and you should lose the right to drive period. Forget the course. Why is society so lenient with dangerous drivers? It just makes no sense. But then we also support completely insane gun laws. This is not the same country I grew up in. Illogic and stupidity reign supreme.
1
@W.H. I don't think she would disagree with you. Calm down and reread her post.
In France, each remiss if driving takes 1-4 points off your record ( 12 points total). When you get below 6, you are required to take a training course (classroom and driving), or loose your license.
The ONLY time I had a point removed (after 25 years living in France), was when my husband took my car and ran over the speed limit (he has a heavy foot and has had to take the classes 3 times for violations). Since it goes according to the license plate, I told him next time, I will contest it and tell them who was driving.
2
Meanwhile, I'm a public school PTA president in a Brooklyn neighborhood with rampant development-gone-wild and nonstop film/tv productions whose been campaigning local officials and the DOT for YEARS to get increased traffic control measures (stop signs, stop lights, speed bumps, and, yes, the much-reviled speed cameras) installed in the area immediately surrounding our school, and I'm getting nowhere. I don't want to wait until someone gets killed by a reckless driver for the city to do something. The safety of pedestrians matters BEFORE we're victims. Part of the issue is that large-scale developments are approved and built without any adjustment to local street infrastructure. It's a pervasive problem, and it is no surprise to me that Brooklyn, which feels like the epicenter of real-estate development, is also the borough with the biggest uptick in incidents involving pedestrian and cyclists.
I'm already a member of the very special club of New Yorkers who've been hit by a car (by an NYPD precinct chief while I was in the crosswalk with the light). I consider myself lucky to be alive. I don't want anyone else to share in this type of experience - even when it's not bad, it's stll awful.
Please reach out to your city councilmembers and state assembly reps to ask for their support in addressing problematic traffic conditions in and around your neighborhoods.
25
I have yet to see a camera system issue a ticket for driving while black or being a teenager in control of a vehicle, or any other abuses from biased human traffic enforcement. Properly used, speed and red light cameras are a good way to objectively determine what vehicles are being recklessly operated so we can get them under control or off the road. We must guard against temptation to use cameras to enhance revenue, and carefully preserve the public trust in the fairness of the systems.
25
@Jim DeBlasio It's not the cameras themselves that are inherently racist in their enforcement. It is the locations and concentrations of speed and red light cameras that is open to racist policy-making. I'm in favor of these cameras, but I would also like to see a map of where they are concentrated and take a hard look at how those locations reflect (or don't) the demographic makeup of the city.
I, for one, am thoroughly against more surveillance in the cause of safety. How about gps speed info of every vehicle sent to a central computer so tickets can be issued to anyone every time they speed? Or cameras on every street with facial recognition software so all jaywalkers can be ticketed? Repeat traffic law offenders should be dealt with appropriately but the total surveillance nanny state is not the way to go in my opinion. It’s alarming how many would welcome this. Those who would trade freedom for security...............
2
@Jessamyn Racist cameras, I've heard it all now from NYC's socialist progressives. Mark my words, NYS and NYC will be the first socialist state in the country with the way the NYS assembly and NYC Council are headed. My family has been here since the 1890's, it's time to move on. The progressives in this city are just as divisive as the orange devil himself. It's their way or the highway, and come May 2021, I'm getting on the highway out of town with the 20 New Yorkers an hour that leave the state
'"It's too much," said Nick Masters, 60, who lives in Far Rockaway, Queens. "This will build another layer of resentment in our drivers that pushes people to leave the city." ' Yes, please repeated speeders and red light runners, leave NYC, and don't move to my town. I wouldn't want you to have another layer of resentment for being held accountable for willfully and carelessly endangering the lives of others.
63
And lets take cars off the road that have their plates covered or shielded.
Also lets re-vamp the DMV.
And get a police unit that pulls over aggressive drivers(un-marked cars for the officers please)
Maybe units that cruise the BQE & the LIE.
12
FIVE red-light violations in a year??
I would think anyone who is convicted of more than 2 or 3 should have their license suspended.
39
Also, this program plans to take away vehicles but not the driver's license?
This is wrong for two reasons:
1) Taking away one's vehicle doesn't prevent them from driving.
2) The taking of property as punishment is likely to be overturned upon judicial review.
3
@Celeste It makes it more difficult for them to drive. Would you lend your car to someone who has had theirs taken away for being a reckless driver?
I’m not sure about the laws in NY regarding taking their cars but in drug cases they can seize property, often on pretty weak evidence. Just about every new program of law enforcement ends up in the courts these days so this one might too.
1
@Celeste What about booting the car? Property stays with the owner but is not operable.
4
New York laws are not even a slap on the wrist but just a poke. In California, one camera operated red light violation is $500 plus a requirement to take a class lest it gets reported on your driving record that will raise your insurance rates. These deterrents are far more effective than the toothless threats in NYC.
42
@Joan Also the exams and driving tests to acquire a license are a joke.
Long time car owner here. Toughening up penalties for actions that endanger pedestrians should absolutely be a priority. However, this proposal seems far too lenient.
People need to be made to realize that they’re operating a machine that’s quite capable of injuring or killing others, and be punished if they fail to use said machine responsibly.
Don’t these moving violations ding an insurance policy? If folks persistently drive recklessly it ought to be prohibitively expensive to insure their vehicles.
I’ve owned a car in NY for approximately 15 years and received exactly one red light violation.
47
"people who rack up multiple speeding or red-light camera violations to take a driving-safety course"
This program is flawed from the beginning and will not hold up in the courts. It assumes that the owner of the vehicle is the driver at the time of violation which of course is not always the case, since no points are assessed to the owner's license.
It's just another excuse to generate revenue targeting all drivers instead off the few who flout the rules of the road.
2
@mlb4ever You quoted the article but seems you didn't read all of it, where this "issue" is addressed
1
@mlb4ever The article discusses the flaws of camera systems. Did you read the whole thing?
1
@mlb4ever How many car owners actually loan out their cars to friends, etc? Given the liability involved that would be nuts. You own the car, you are responsible for it.
2
The statistics on the number of vehicles caught by cameras needs to be improved with control groups. Of course the same car driving the same route every day will more likely be ticketed.
Regarding the red light cameras -- these violations are hugely a function of the length of the yellow preceding it. While peds get a head start, drivers should get a decent yellow signal instead of a shortened one to clip them for a ticket.
25 mph on some avenues is too low. Meanwhile people jaywalk and dare drivers. Ticket the asphalt torreadors as well.
Lastly, the ability of some union drivers to avoid accountability is amazing. All these trash truck and bus drivers have to say is "I didn't see the bicyclist" and they get away with it.
2
The driver who ran over Ruthie Ann Miles, while killing her daughter and another child, had 4 violations for speeding and 4 for running red lights. This new law would not have stopped her because it is too lenient. Furthermore, the woman had MS and was prone to seizures. No one prone to seizures should be driving. Enforcement of health restrictions should be looked at too.
87
Bans on red light cameras are fascinating, it's too much to expect that people stop at red light?
20
I live in Las Vegas and the amount of red light runners in this city is astonishing! Sometimes I see up to five cars running a light long after its been red. Now you almost have to wait 30 seconds before gunning a green light because you never know who will come barreling through the intersection. We absolutely need to crack down. I never thought I would be a supporter of red light cameras. Sadly though, we also live in a city where you can continually pay traffic lawyers who get these tickets reduced to parking tickets (DUI's can be paid off too). I suppose the real problem is that people know there will be no real consequences for their actions... until they kill someone.
15
@Redd and even then with a good lawyer Americans tend to get a slap on the wrist for killing a pedestrian. Driving is a privilege not a right.
2
The NYC Mayor and the Council are powerless to act, as the laws that govern license suspension are written in Albany. For the past four legislative sessions, neither the Governor nor the Legislature have made any meaningful changes in the DUI laws, nor have they made any progress in criminalizing the refusal for drivers to take sobriety tests. Our Governor and Legislators live under the illusion that announcing the occasional sobriety "crackdown" is the equivalent of passing meaningful legislation. Even when one of their own (Assemblyman Brian Kolb) is caught violating these laws while driving a NY-State issued vehicle, they close ranks. Our Governor and the members of the legislature are, for the most part, complicit by their silence.
7
@Mike Gera
brian kolb was bombed. little bit different than speeding.
After doing some googling, around 200 pedestrians die every year in NYC. This does not include cyclists, which is around 14 per year. The data is not available for all of 2019 yet; these numbers are from 2018. Less than half of the people in NYC - just 45% - have driver's licenses. Most people are not driving to work, or for shopping. They risk their lives every day to walk city streets.
So why are so many cars clogging the city? Driving in NYC is beyond difficult, which is why most people prefer the bus, subway, taxis, cycling, walking, etc. Queens & parts of Brooklyn seem to be the most dangerous to me.
More options for mass transit, like the old trolleys, and vehicle free roads would be a blessing. Times Square has vastly improved since there are fewer cars allowed in that area. Why not expand the number of roads, so people are encouraged to walk?
Trucks should be banned during the day. The trucks tie up Manhattan streets all the time. We gave up driving to NYC years ago, just not worth the hassle to see the Rockefeller Christmas tree. Although we live not far from NYC, we rarely go there. The expense & aggravation are just not worth it.
Dangerous drivers should not be allowed to drive, period.
14
@LovesGermanShepherds oops meant "expand the number of roads barred to vehicles" like in congested places. Times Square has become so much better for pedestrians and friendly to tourists.
As others have said, increase the fines, lower the speed limit in dangerous areas so people stop speeding.
There are lots of cases in the city where large trucks backing up have killed pedestrians too.
For people that can't give up their cars, move out of the city already. Or take an uber.
5
@LovesGermanShepherds
I say put in high speed rail. I agree since time square doesn't allow cars anymore. I also agree with trucks being banned. they tie up traffic all the time. and I agree dangerous drivers should not be allowed to drive period.
7
@jennifer t. schultz If trucks are banned how will store supplies (like food to grocery stores) be delivered? Magic carpets? Yes, trucks are a problem, but cars are easier to reduce n numbers because the drivers & riders can take public transportation.
8
Interesting an argument against taking away someone’s car was, might make them want to leave town. Sounds like a good outcome to me.
109
@Paulette Delahoussaye Taking someone's car away is not the solution. A heavy fine and a suspended license would work better.
@Mickela
Why, so they can just take a chance and drive anyway (as all too many do)? If they have no license, no need to have a car anymore. I know I'D start thinking seriously about improving my driving.
2
On my way into work today I was about to enter a crosswalk (guided by the white “walk” symbol) when a school bus driver decided to ignore the sign and enter at the same time. I held up my hand to indicate I had the right of way, but he looked straight at me and kept right on going, passing just inches from me. Had I trusted the light or his abilities, I would have been right but dead. And I can be fairly certain that nothing would have happened to him because there would be “no criminality suspected”.
The laws protecting reckless drivers are long overdue for a massive overhaul.
122
@Virgil I hope you reported the driver to the school district. Too many complaints and they’d probably fire them.
5
1. If you kill someone with a car, it's not an "accident". It is murder. Prosecute as such, and change the law if necessary.
2. Two moving violations: suspend license for a a year. Driving with a suspended license: a year in jail.
40
@Jonathan Katz Not always. People do stupid things sometimes. I think just about everyone has had a close call when a kid on a bike speeds off the sidewalk in front of you, or someone wearing dark clothes on a black night steps out from between parked cars or tries to cross against the light. However if you are being a cautious driver, not speeding and paying proper attention, the risk of an accident is much lower.
1
Safe-driving courses are a joke. Anyone with 5 speeding- or red-light tickets should get a whopping fine AND jail time - not a lot of jail time, just enough to make it hurt.
Frankly, j-walking pedestrians are part of the problem, but they get extremely bad punishment if caught by bad drivers.
15
@Andy.
okay I got hit 25 yrs ago crossing at 12 noon. my daughter as well. we were crossing at the light with the cross walk symbol(they don't leave the walking white light up long enough)and I got hit . was not jay walking.
4
‘De Blasio has made street safety his priority’- and failed miserably at it, along with everything else.
5
To the driver who complained that the new rules would engender resentment and cause such people to leave New York, please do leave if you must speed and run lights.
147
5 violations? A 90 minute course? Anything more than two speeding violations in a year should point to bad behavior in need of correcting.
Isn’t a 90 minute sit-through merely a slap on the wrist? Three such successive periods, with a pass or fail oral exam would have remedial effect, or root out repeat offenders.
Surely, for preventative measures, our non-motorist citizens deserve nothing less.
15
This is a complete failure and shows the power of the gas and automobile industries.
7
Nick Masters of Queens said “This will just build another layer of resentment in our drivers that pushes people to leave the city.”
Hey Nick, here's a novel thought: STOP SPEEDING AND RUNNING RED LIGHTS!
And here's another thought: If you drive in NYC and can't obey simple traffic laws, leave! Please! You won't be missed! In fact, I'll pay for your tank of gas to leave permanently.
93
Five red lights or fifteen speeding violations? That's crazy...what a world!
Give that law some teeth and lower those numbers down to three.
And about not discouraging "drivers" from leaving the city? You mean coddle and grease the ways for the drivers who kill and maim?
13
The 2010 NYC Department of Transportation Pedestrian Action Plan found that running a red light or a stop sign was associated with 1.5% of crashes where pedestrians were killed or seriously injured, while speeding was associated with 21.6% of such crashes.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/nyc_ped_safety_study_action_plan_technical_supplement.pdf
3
NY Times, please stop with the obligatory quotes from the National Motorist Association, which is nothing more than an industry-financed car advocacy group consisting of a handful of paid people in an office in Waunakee, Wisconsin.
This is a very good bill and will definitely make NYC streets safer for pedestrians and cyclists. The number of vehicles subject to impound will grow beyond 5000 as speed camera deployment continues to increase through 2021.
26
Why wait until 5 red lights and 15 (!) speeding violations? That's insanely lenient. Ticket them more heavily and take their licenses away. A meaningless 'safety course' will do nothing to curb their reckless behavior, but empty pockets might.
27
I don't own a car and am otherwise uninformed on the issue, but what is the role of insurance, civil litigation over medical bills, pain and suffering, etc., when a driver is at fault for injuring a pedestrian? Wouldn't drivers be wiped out financially or does insurance pay the costs involved?
1
@Jim56
Probably most people who drive in a reckless manner have little or no assets and the cheapest insurance policy or no insurance at all. They are not able to cover the financial losses and in most case don't really care--or they wouldn't drive they way they do.
4
@Jay How many are driving impaired by drugs or alcohol? If you’re an addict a 90 minute course won’t help. I hope they have a tougher approach for those people. My state has a huge crystal meth problem and I’m sure there are many people driving high every day.
1
Please, stop the both-siderism; disproportionate weight is given to outliers, and financial incentives are often cloaked in 'freedom'. National Motorists Association is for-profit lobbyist and special interest group that fights against societal and environmental protections like lower speed limits, and tighter DUI standards.
22
The timing of this is appreciated, NY and my neighborhood in Park Slope, needs to do more to protect its pedestrians.
Last week, my 6-year-old son and I were walking across 10th street and 5th ave on Thursday evening and we both were hit by a White Nissan Sedan that ran a red light. I was thrown onto the hood of the car and my body smashed her windshield, my son hit his head and face. The driver went through one crosswalk, the intersection and then hit us in the second crosswalk. She to police that she had a green light, claiming no responsibility- which is exactly why we need a program like this to provide driver safety education and consequences to bad drivers. I am very thankful to have a witness and to the four bystanders who helped me and my son.
How does this new legislation apply to out of state drivers? The woman who hit us was from MA.
I support this legislation, there is NO downside to saving lives, and preventing repeat offenders from continuing to hurt people. I do feel strongly that the number of violations needs to be lowered to the second offense. Too many people are getting hit- look at the statistics. Driving is a privilege and drivers need to be held responsible for how they navigate in our city streets.
64
"...vehicles that get five red-light camera tickets or 15 speed-camera violations in a year..." should be impounded, until the owner and/or driver has not only taken a safety course, but one with a driving instructor. They should also be required to retake their road test. A driver's license is a privilege, not a right. No one is entitled to one.
The problem with this program is that training is being suggested after the problem has taken root. A 90 minute course on safety is going to be treated as a joke.
The courses and requirements to get a driver's license should be made more difficult, and we should all have to retest every so often, as bad habits set in.
Many European nations use insurance as a tool for enforcing this. Taking additional driver training can significantly reduce your insurance. In some nations, additional training is required in order to buy a vehicle with a more powerful engine.
Piloting several tons of steel is serious business. Those who cannot be bothered to do it well, and those who want self driving vehicles, can take public transportation.
11
My son, who lives in Vancouver,, B.C., had his car impounded for exceeding the speed for entering a freeway onramp by 5 miles. It was his first violation ever.
While that seems excessive, speeding, Canada has strict law governing vehicle violations and, I would venture, a lower pedestrian death rate.
We take DUIs seriously, surely allowing someone to continue to drive after receiving 10 speeding violations is no less agregious than driving drunk.
61
It is important to keep dangerous drivers off the roads. New York City, with its high population density and crowded streets is especially vulnerable.
But I must question whether automated traffic camera technology is reliable enough on which to basis taking away someone's car. For a recent lesson on the risks of over-reliance on unproven technology, Google "Iowa Caucus."
This article cites studies that correlate traffic camera violations with repeat offenders; but it doesn't provide documentation that the devices are reliable. There are well described cases of municipalities using, or misusing, traffic cameras to generate revenue rather than enhance safety; Chicago comes to mind.
And then there's NYS's new "green light" law, which grants drivers licenses to illegal immigrants. Hopefully, there will be follow-up studies regarding whether or not this law has unintended consequences in terms of serious traffic violations.
Again, unsafe drivers are a life threatening problem, but seizing cars based on automated mechanisms should only be considered if the cameras have been proven to be highly reliable, with no false "violations".
4
@Alex: I would call your attention to many studies (easy enough to find online, though I don't link here) showing that the overall misdemeanor and crime rates are lower among immigrants, documented or not.
4
@Alex: I would call your attention to many studies (easy enough to find online, though I don't link here) showing that the overall misdemeanor and crime rates are lower among immigrants, documented or not.
2
@Alex: I would call your attention to many studies (easy enough to find online, though I don't link here) showing that the overall misdemeanor and crime rates are lower among immigrants, documented or not.
2
That plus the increasing trend in using fast-pickup electrical vehicles. They accelerate too quickly both at startup and at speed for safely driving city traffic. Drivers see the caution light and jam the accelerator, and the high-torque electric engine doubles their speed in a blink.
2
I have no problem with any of the proposals . However only if there is assurance that the cameras are accurate. In Baltimore the speed camera program was shut down for several years due to ample evidence that they were not accurate, gave numerous false readings even cited on cars that were not moving
The program was administered under contract to a private company, with little if any accountability . The Baltimore speed camera program was clearly implemented for revenue enhancement , not for safety
12
It is well overdue for there to be serious penalties for drivers who run down pedestrians and bicyclists. It has been maddening to see the death toll rise, while drivers are not even issued citations.
19
“It’s too much,” said Nick Masters, 60, who lives in Far Rockaway, Queens. “This will just build another layer of resentment in our drivers that pushes people to leave the city.”
Okay, so having to take a single 90-minute safety course after having plowed through FIVE red lights or gotten FIFTEEN speeding violations, is an imposition worthy of moving house and home? Good gracious.
Driving is a privilege, not a right, folks.
318
@An American pedestrians and bicyclist being run down, crazy drivers are a reason some people do not stay in the city. Seems like a fair trade for me.
18
“It’s too much,” said Nick Masters, 60, who lives in Far Rockaway, Queens. “This will just build another layer of resentment in our drivers that pushes people to leave the city.”
I don't think anyone will mind if Nick leaves. Sounds like he's already exceeded his layer of resentment quota.
Another thought: import a large number of the famously merciless LAPD traffic force and let them have a go.
77
How many of these accidents were due to the driver looking at their phone? I feel that must be responsible for the increase, at least in part. As a pedestrian, I always now make sure to make eye contact with the driver before crossing. I see so many drivers looking at their phones and not at the road. I just saw one the other day. Last spring, I very nearly got hit by a car making a left turn. Once I realized she was accelerating toward me rather than just starting to make the turn while I crossed, I screamed and started running and at the last second, she miraculously saw me and slammed on the brake. The bumper was less than a foot from my calf. When she rolled down her window to apologize, my first instinct was to scream, “Were you looking at your phone?” But she claimed she had been looking right to check oncoming traffic. I don’t know if I believe her. In a pedestrian-heavy area in Brooklyn, who doesn’t also check for pedestrians?
I think we would all be safer if phones had a built-in system that turned off all notifications if the maps’ direction system is engaged and the phone appears to be moving at a speed that indicates it is in a car. Can Apple and Android manufacturers make that happen?
20
This article could benefit in at least a few places from clarifying wording. For example: “Ms. Cohen’s 12-year-old son was killed by a van in Brooklyn in 2014”. I realize (assume) the driver didn’t intentionally aim for the human, but the van didn’t go out and kill the child.
One key word in the copy though is “resentment” — a powerful force, and a strong we see here, a deadly one. Just a chain of destruction, including a suicide.
I don’t necessarily think that the driver (not the or car or other vehicle, but the person) should be penalized by having vehicle safety confiscated or not being permitted to drive. It’s tempting to suggest the punishment include serving in a morgue or rehabilitation capacity so they can observe the result of their recklessness. The patterns of driver behavior are pretty disturbing.
6
@Present Occupant I would surmise that the choice in wording was because that death was an accident where there was no blame on the driver. The child ran into the street from between parked cars to retrieve a soccer ball after the the light changed and was wearing cleats and slipped.
Not saying it wasn't horrible, just that the choice of words was probably intentional and appropriate.
The original title called it a crackdown, and I find it ludicrous.
Is this really the best NYC can do? The "crackdown" starts only AFTER a driver gets 5 red-light camera tickets or 15 speed-camera violations in a year? Seriously?
If you're running a red light means that you're either speeding to begin with or gunning to beat the yellow. And there's just no excuse for 15 speed-camera violations (most of which are placed near schools).
As Fleming said, once is happenstance, twice is coincidence and three times it's an act of war.
Like in baseball, should be 3 strikes and you're out. It's not that difficult to avoid speeding - just keep the speedometer at or below the speed limit.
154
@C In NY
Actually, driving 25 mph in a modern car is somewhat tricky. The transmission is set to maximize fuel mileage and tries to pick a higher gear, which tends to make it go a little faster. The town I live in is notorious for enforcing its 25mph speed limit on Main Street, and it is much easier to maintain that with our manual transmission vehicles. The automatics always want to creep up to 30 or drop under 20.
FWIW, the green phase for Manhattan used to be set at about 28mph.
C - exactly my thoughts? 5 and 15? Nonsense, make it 3 strikes and they loose driver license for 6months - one year
1
@NYCGal the problem with only suspending a license is many of the reckless drivers will continue to drive anyway. The penalty for driving with a suspended license is also way too lenient. The woman who killed the children in Brooklyn was told by her doctors to stop driving because of her medical condition. She kept driving anyway.
4
To respond to several comments: You don't get points on your license from traffic camera tickets. It doesn't go through the criminal/traffic courts. It's an administrative process. You pay the fine you receive in the mail or you file an appeal with the city if you believe that you are not responsible. It doesn't go through the courts.
1
it may be more prevalent in NYC due to the high volume of drivers. But that is happening here in Colorado Springs as well and other cities.
4
Am sorry but if you ran red lights or went over 5 miles the speed limi more than once then your license should be suspended for at least a month and your car should be turned over to the city (so many are probably driving with a suspended license). Someone will learn their lesson probably a bit faster after not having access to their car for a month than simply sitting in a "drive safely" course. Am also curious if the first line of the story refers to the woman who had a history of seizure and was told not to drive by her doctor and went against his recommendations. She should have had her license and car taken away after the 3 violation. Those poor kids would still be alive today if that happened.
53
@Jonathan
So turning over your vehicle to the city (and no doubt being charged inflated storage charges for that privilege) is a good choice? Yes, it may keep the offending driver from using that particular car, but it may also affect the rest of the family who may lawfully use and need it. In our rush to deal with legitimate problems, we are often too quick to draconian responses.
4
@George S
Yep, and those family members who are inconvenienced can remind the offender on a daily basis, why it is they are being inconvenienced.
That might have more effect than anything else.
20
@George S I understand your point and I respect it but what is more worth, a family member or two that are inconvenienced or a family that has to deal with the loss of a loved one? I also don't believe the city should be charging a fee and there should be some exceptions if the person relies on their car to sustain an income for example. Then there should be a hefty fine AND attending driving-safely courses.
5
Thank you for this column. Toronto is just setting out on the same journey and it is helpful to hear how NYC is handling it.
One question: the article says the experience in Europe is that the effectiveness of the cameras depends on whether the cameras are visible. Does this mean they should or should not be visible?
I suspect they should be visible. Driving in Scotland my GPS always informed me when we were approaching a photo radar site.
6
@Alan White
To act as a deterrent to all, not just to catch offenders, it's best to make the cameras visible.
In the UK, it's the law that signs are required - a picture of a camera - if a stretch of road is monitored by cameras. The signs do not have to be next to the camera, just in the vicinity, so you may see quite a few signs over a distance, but only one camera is operating.
On some urban roads where speeding is a problem we've also got signs that tell passing drivers the speed they are doing. This encourages the driver to lower their speed.
The downside is that on major roads outside urban areas there is quite a lot of speeding - drivers are encouraged to speed when there are no signs indicating cameras!
2
Wasn't there another headline the other day that read "A young father was investigated four times. Then his newborn died" which seems a companion headline to the title of this article on traffic deaths.
In both mortal situations, it seems that the systems "in charge" need to be thoroughly and completely dismatled and overhauled along with their respective administrative codes and policies. To say nothing of the personnel that staff these agencies, all the way up to the top of the chain. In these cases no, there are no "good ones."
9
If the driver can’t listen to the laws of the NYC, then they should not be allowed to drive. I don’t drive because I have epilepsy but I know people who do. I know someone who lost two of the daughter’s because a driver had a seizure while driving.
43
The short answer is absolutely not. My aunt killed another person: had an adverse reaction to the medication she took for bi-polar disorder and fell asleep briefly. I was her executor and was terrified this would happen again. Not until her insurance broker told her many years later that she should quit driving did she.
Taking a license away from another person is almost as hard as having them declared incompetent.
This should not be. But it is.
18
The behavior of most motorists in NYC has led me to believe that red signals are just guidance. Everyday I walk along 42nd st back to Grand Central and watch cars speed through a red, watched by the traffic officers as 50-100 pedestrians have to delay a safe crossing.
In absence of any other enforcement, red light cameras would help crackdown.
71
"Both speeding and red-light violations carry a $50 fine."
Speeding on an open highway may not be a great danger. But speeding in a crowded city like New York is indeed a great danger, and running a red light anywhere is a tremendous danger. Since many motorists can readily afford a $50 fine, I would hope that much more deterrent punishments can be imposed.
164
@polymath my thoughts exactly! A minimum fine of $500 per violation seems more in line with the 2020 economy. For heavens sake, people pay $50,000 for a vehicle and $700 for a phone.
49
@polymath
The 2010 NYC Department of Transportation Pedestrian Action Plan found that running a red light or a stop sign was associated with 1.5% of crashes where pedestrians were killed or seriously injured, while speeding was associated with 22.4% of such crashes.
Speeding is indeed the far greater danger in New York City
7
@polymath I like how Finland handles the problem: Your fine is based on your income.
17
I am a bit surprised that a driver could accumulate so many traffic violations, and subsequently, points on their license, and retain a valid driver’s license. Not to mention the cost of insurance.
234
@Ian read the article - violations caught on cameras DO NOT result in license points in NY.
And cops rarely issue moving violations because they are generally too busy ticketing bicyclists commuting to and from work or Uber drivers dropping off or picking up passengers barely one foot into the crosswalk outside Penn Station (which I see happen literally every day).
23
@Ian
I am not sure how it works in New York but in Maryland tickets issued for violations noted by camera do not come with points as they do not know who the driver of the car is. Therefore no loss of insurance or license. I do like NYC's idea of mandatory safety classes for repeat offenders.
9
@DK Really? I have never seen a bicyclist being ticketed - not the ones who run through red lights, nor the ones riding on the sidewalks. I was hit three separate times in the summer of 2017 alone, on the sidewalk by three individual delightful Millenials who apparently were raised under rocks.
Not by commuters or bike messengers. I had to change my commute in order to avoid further injury. These selfish bike enthusiasts, who resent pedestrians and hit them with impunity present a danger to us all. I saw one mow a woman down in the East Village and ride on without a backward glance. Of course, as bikes aren't registered, witnesses don't have a chance of finding the wrongdoer short of chasing him down the street. I'm all for dreaming we live in Paris, serenely pedaling our way through flower markets and down cobbled streets, baguette in hand, but let's all get real. This is New York City. This city was never meant for as many cars as we have -- especially now that Uber and Via drivers in their enormous vans clog the streets as they prowl endlessly in waiting for their app to direct them to their next cut rate fare -- let alone bicyclists. Attempting to turn the City into a biker's paradise is only increasing congestion and danger to pedestrians.
31
How do these red light runner, speeders get car insurance with so many infractions??? Insurance companies need to refuse to insure vehicles that are tied to multiple camera tickets.
As usual, the actions of a few impact the actions of many.
34
@Kris Bennett I suspect, unfortunately, that many of the worst offenders may not be insured. These are not our most upstanding citizens.
16
@Sean G We have tough laws on uninsured driving already.
"Under Section 319 of the New York Vehicle and Traffic Code, if you are caught driving your vehicle without proper insurance, you will be cited, and your license will be revoked for at least one year. The cost of your citation will be a fine of between $150 and $1,500, or 15 days in jail."
1
@Bella Wilfer That law may be effective when someone gets pulled over by a police officer. The scofflaws caught by a camera will slip through the net though.
2
Wow! There are 5,000 people in NYC who run run more than five red lights a year or have more than 15 speed violations in a year? Is there no point system in New York State?
I am in Ohio and a speeding violation carries 2 points (more if it's egregiously above the speed limit) and a red-light violation is 2 points as well. A DUI is six points. There is a max of 12 points, lifetime, on a license, and at most 2 can be eliminated per year. After 12 points licenses are suspended.
100
@Pierre New York also has a point system for moving violations. I believe a speeding ticket for 10 above the limit is 4 points and that 11 points is a license suspension.
But the article is about violations issued automatically by cameras, which apparently don't result in points on your license.
19
So many solutions...Ban Suvs, Lower the speed limit to 15, Require full stop before a turn, and of course maybe, if we ask really really nicely we could get a few of our 35,000 police officers to enforce motor vehicle laws (of course they themselves would have to follow them also.)
103
@Ace Why SUVs? Why are SUVs the problem here?
4
@Kelly SUVs (like trucks) dangerously block sight-lines for other drivers in normal-sized cars. They are also gas-guzzling, polluting, road hogs. In NYC, the number of big shot investment bankers (or whatever), including the Mayor, who insist on being driven in these vehicles, when hybrid cars such as Prius are available, is astounding.
39
@Ace
An SUV is a passenger vehicle like sedans, sports cars, taxis, Ubers, etc. Just like headlines which grant them seemingly autonomous power ("SUV runs down pedestrian"...what, on its own, it wasn't the driver??), this obsession with blaming SUVs for traffic problems is, frankly, silly.
5
So, these traffic violators will eventually be arrested, but what good will that do when there will be no bail required? They'll just end up leaving the courthouse, jumping in their cars and driving home (and hopefully they won't violate any rules on the way). We're so smart here in NY.
41
@KathyS
There are other ways of changing peoples' behavior besides throwing them in jail, where all of us are paying to keep them there.
1