Getting Ready For an Accident

Getting Ready For an Accident, Accidents are by definition unexpected, but it's still a good idea to make some preparations ahead of time - just in case.

* Prepare your car - Keep a notepad and pencil (not a pen; they dry up) in the glovebox so you'll have something to write details about the accident on - instead of an old Taco Bell chalupa wrapper. If there are injuries or major damage involved, it may help you in court (or with your insurance company) to have precise details you can refer back to.

Use your cell phone's video camera (or keep a disposable digital camera in the car someplace) to record things such as skid marks or a tree that obscured a stop sign. It's a good idea to carry a couple of flares in the trunk. These can help avoid a secondary accident - another car piling into your damaged vehicle, because the driver didn't see it in time to slow down or move over.

A flashlight (with good batteries) and a blanket in the trunk are good to have, too.

if you're one of the few people (like me) who doesn't have a cell phone, consider buying one of those inexpensive, for-emergency-use only phones to keep in the car. They're made to call 911 only, so there's no monthly plan.

* Prepare yourself - Every time you get behind the wheel, assume you'll be involved in an accident. Wear you seat belt. And even more importantly, drive distrustfully. Don't enter an intersection without looking left and right - even if you have a green light. Red light running is epidemic and the fact that you have the legal right-of-way won't protect you from being T-boned.

Be on the lookout for addled/oblivious drivers - the ones who are so busy talking on their cell or scarfing down a meal they don't notice you are in their blind spot. Scan your mirrors constantly - especially your rear view mirror when stopped in traffic. You may notice that a huge SUV is barreling toward your rear end in time to take evasive action - or at least brace for the impact and lessen the chances of a disabling whiplash-type neck injury.

Practice emergency braking in order to become familiar with how your vehicle reacts - and how long it takes to come to a complete stop. If your vehicle has ABS - and most cars built since about 2005 do - find an open stretch of road without much traffic on it and mash the pedal all the way to floor as hard as you can. (The ABS system will keep the wheels from locking up and you will still be able to steer the car.) This will give you a feel for how quickly your car can stop in a maximum-effort. emergency situation. Think about where you'd try to point the car if you had to swerve suddenly. Notice things like big trees - so you can at least try to avoid piling into them head on. Look for "soft landings" - or at least, softer landings.

* Follow post-accident protocol - If you do wind up involved in an accident (especially a fender-bender) the first thing to do is get yourself out of the way of further possible harm by moving out of and away from your vehicle. Some people understandably don't want to move their cars before the police arrive so that it's easier to determine fault (for insurance/court purposes) and that's fine - but don't mill around in traffic waiting for the police to show up. It's a good way to get killed by an oblivious rubber necked.

Exchange information with the other driver - name, address, driver's license number/state of issue; phone number(s) and all insurance information. Be sure the name of the driver matches the name of the listed insured on the insurance card. You should also write down on your pad the year, make and model of the other vehicle and its license plate number - as well as its overall condition and the areas where it was damaged. If you have your cell phone/disposable camera, take pictures of both vehicles, including areas not damaged. This is a good way to protect yourself against being charged with doing damage you didn't do. A photograph is worth a thousand words - especially in court.

If the other driver refuses to show you his driver's license or insurance information and you have a cell phone, immediately call the police. While it's not a legal requirement in many areas to wait for police after a minor fender-bender, it is a legal requirement to exchange driver's license and insurance information - and a major violation to drive without a valid license or insurance coverage. If something like this happens to you and the other driver looks like he's going to flee the scene, memorize the plate number of his car and a physical description of him - and get on the phone, call the cops. Hit and run is an even bigger deal than driving without a valid license or insurance coverage.

* Call your insurance company - Do this as soon as possible after the accident. Give them all the details you jotted down on your pad. Use your notes to help reconstruct what happened. If the accident was your fault - and you want to do the right thing - admit it. If it wasn't - or you don't know whose fault it was - leave it up to the insurance company to sort out.

If the accident involved personal injury, major damage and/or tickets, your insurer may provide legal counsel for your court date (depending on the type of coverage you have). There is one case where you may not want to call the insurance company - a minor accident, especially one involving just you (no other car). In this case, paying for the damages "out of pocket" will be a relatively small, one-time hit to your wallet - as opposed to the very real possibility of several years of higher insurance premiums based on your filing a claim and the fact that you now have an accident on record. As a general rule, if the cost to fix the damage is about the same as your deductible, it might be a better deal to just cut a check - and live and learn.

Read more »

Fast Lanes for Faster Drivers?

Fast Lanes for Faster Drivers?

Is anyone happy with the way our traffic system works? We have what you might call a least common denominator, "one size fits all" licensing system that arguably serves no one well.

Example: Drivers with experience and above-average skill (demonstrated by passing a more difficult driving test, or having successfully earned a certificate from a high-performance driving school such as Bondurant or Skip Barber, etc.) could probably be trusted to drive considerably faster than currently posted maximum lawful speeds of 70-75 mph (which is what speed limits were circa 1970) without endangering themselves or others.

In practice, of course, they already do. But despite their ability to drive faster safely, they're lumped in with the least competent via dumbed-down speed limits that put them in almost constant jeopardy of being radar-trapped into a $150 piece of payin' paper.

On the flip side, marginal and outright incompetent drivers are not treated as such by the system. Jut the opposite. They are often rewarded - or at least, encouraged to think they are "good drivers" by dint of the fact that they don't "speed."

That they often tailgate, wander across the double yellow, blow through red lights - and so on - hardly seems to matter since for the most part, these offenses are not the focus of traffic safety enforcement. "Speeding" is the major no-no, even though driving faster than a number painted on a sign may have no bearing whatever on how safely (or not) you happen to be driving.

Since so little is expected of all drivers, the general level of skill is very low. This almost certainly makes it less safe out there than it ought to be - and easily could be.

But how to reconcile the good drivers with the bad ones - or at least, to not punish the good drivers just because they transgress against laws intended for the benefit of the not-so-good drivers?

A tiered system of licensing - with "fast lanes" on highways set aside for those who have passed more demanding proficiency requirements - could make driving safer and more pleasant for everyone. Such a system exists already in countries like Germany and the results have been hard to argue with: Germany enjoys a generally higher average skill level for its drivers (because getting a license over there is n easy thing, as it is here) and an accident/fatality rate that is better than ours, despite often much faster rates of travel.

In a tiered system, there are two categories of driver's license: The Basic and the Expert (with a Learner's for teenaged/first-time drivers).

In order to get your Basic license, you'd have to pass a written test proving that you know the rules of the road such as what the passing lane is for, who goes first at 4-way stops and so on. In addition to the written part, an actual on-road "road test" would be next - one that actually requires the subject being tested to prove basic competence behind the wheel in real-word driving conditions. The test would take at least 30 minutes and involve driving on secondary roads and highways, merging with traffic, parallel parking and so on.

This alone would result in a major uptick in the ability of the typical American motorist, simply by dint of weeding out the people who haven't yet mastered the skills needed to safely operate a motor vehicle. Currently, most states require nothing more demanding than a few turns around some cones in the DMV parking lot - or a cursory drive around the block. This is outrageous given the responsibility that comes with driving a motor vehicle.

Successful passage of an actual road test in real-world conditions - as is the practice in many European countries - ought to be a mandatory minimum before any person is allowed onto public roads. But of course, it's not. We literally let almost anyone who can insert a key into the ignition switch and pull the lever into "Drive" get a license - and not just a Basic license, but an "open class" license with no restrictions placed on the person whatsoever.

It's interesting that the self-styled "safety advocates" who complain endlessly about "speeding" rarely, if ever, focus on our frighteningly lax driver's licensing procedures. A "speeder" is arguably less dangerous than a person who timidly creeps into fast-moving traffic or constantly wanders across the double yellow in curves or who parks in the far left lane at exactly 55 mph, refusing to yield to faster-moving traffic.

But back to tiered licenses. After a person acquires their first or Basic license and drives without incident for say two years, he would be eligible for an Expert endorsement (like the current "m" endorsement required to operate a motorcycle in many states). Additional training - such as successful completion of a high-performance driving school - could be the basic requirement for the "expert" endorsement, along with a DMV record free of any record of at-fault accidents or convictions for things that genuinely reflect careless or dangerous driving, such as DWI.

The holder of an Expert endorsement would be allowed to operate his vehicle on dedicated fast lanes with higher maximum speed limits - or even no formal speed limits at all, as on the German Autobahns.

Unsafe? Scary? Not really. The Germans are very strict about their training and licensing requirements - but once an applicant has made the cut, the German authorities leave it up to him to judge what speed is safe. And it works quite well. The accident/fatality rate on the Autobahns - where cars routinely cruise at 100 mph - is lower than it is on our Interstate highways, where it is rarely legal to drive faster than 70 mph.

A tiered licensing system and fast lanes could accomplish several worthwhile things:

* It would give all drivers something to strive for - encouraging the acquisition of a higher level of skill behind the wheel. This would tend to lift the quality of the driving pool in general, which would make the driving environment safer for everyone.

* It would end the revenue-motivated harassment of drivers who are able to safely handle high-speed driving but who are currently subject to being ticketed merely because they happen to be driving faster than a number painted on a sign.

* Police could devote their energies to identifying and weeding out the genuinely dangerous drivers - tailgaters, people who refuse to yield to faster-moving traffic, drunks, the reckless, etc. This would do much to increase highway safety. It would also go a long way toward rebuilding the diminished stature of the highway patrol in the minds of many motorists, who have become very cynical about law enforcement as a result of radar traps and "speed enforcement" in general.

It'd be a pretty cool thing for all concerned - if it could ever be realized.

Read more »