|
PA
Speeding Statistics
(In
2000) 12,626 were killed in speeding-related crashes across the country.
Of
these 12,626 - 582 were killed in PA.
314
died on non-interstates with a posted speed limit less than 55mph, but
greater than 35mph.
Speeding is a factor in 30% of all fatal crashes.
(In
2000) $1,114,000 was spent in Pennsylvania associated with these
crashes.
In
America, 75% of all roads are under the jurisdiction of local government
(cities, towns and counties).
Pennsylvania is the ONLY state where municipal police officers are not
allowed, by law, to use radar for speed enforcement!
Where to find more
information?
www.nhtsa.dot.gov
www.autoaccidentlegalcenter.com
www.saferoads.org
In Pennsylvania, lawmakers trust police
officers with guns that kill, but not with a gun to . . .
issue a traffic ticket? |
Why? . . .
In every state except Pennsylvania, municipal police officers are authorized
to use radar to enforce speed limits. But in this state, only the
Pennsylvania State Police have the authority to use radar, still one of the
most effective and accurate speed control devices available. Access to
using radar has been denied to local police by the state legislature for
over 40 years.
During those 40 years, local police have asked legislators for this
authority countless times. Every effort has been thwarted in some form or
another. Bills have been introduced in every session, but they either die
in committee or contain provisions that no one could realistically support.
Over the years, local police have dispelled numerous myths as to why they
were not included. For example, some opponents have alleged that local
police are not well trained; in actuality they receive over 750 hours of
training and annual updates.
Municipal police have also been accused of wanting radar to generate revenue
for their municipality. In fact, a provision has been added to legislation
to prevent this from happening. Currently, municipal police have other
tools available to write traffic citations and, if they so intended, to make
traffic control a revenue generator. However, this is certainly not a
widespread practice now, nor would it be if the technology was improved.
This apprehension is misplaced and the sentiment itself is unfair and
insulting to Pennsylvania’s professional law enforcement community. Your
local police chiefs are not interested in serving as the “cash collector”
for local government. Instead, their concerns are for public welfare and
how to keep the streets and highways safe for motorists -- the people the
chiefs and their officers are sworn to protect and serve.
When, and if, undertaking traffic control, municipal police are currently
forced to rely upon lesser technology, such as ESP (Excessive Speed Preventer), VASCAR or Accutrak, devices. These methods of speed enforcement
operate like a stopwatch and require the use of physical markers, such as
lines painted on the road. Police officers then start and stop the device
to determine a vehicle’s rate of speed. Defense lawyers challenge the
accuracy of the calculated speed, because a police officer has to manually
operate the instrument. By this time, the issue of traffic safety is almost
totally forgotten.
Day in and day out, thousands of men and women in "blue" lay their lives on
the line to protect the citizens of this Commonwealth. They are given a gun
in order to protect citizens against deadly force. Why then would they not
be issued tools to protect citizens in traffic situations, which can often
be just as deadly? Local police have fought this battle for forty years, yet
the legislature continues to deny them from using one of the best tools
available to help save lives and, therefore, to serve the public, to reduce
crime and to give local communities the right to self-governance, service
and public safety. It would take a one mere sentence change in the Vehicle
Code to include municipal police and to allow their use of this valuable
tool. Why then, does this inequity continue?
Legislation is again being circulated to provide the use of radar to
municipal police officers. The bill will contain the following
provisions:
- Designed to address
potential abuse.
- Use permitted only by
full time police officers
- Employed by full time,
full service police agencies
- Requires an approved
course of training
- Control of perceived
use as a revenue generator: Generation of revenue demonstrated if 5% or
more of the total municipal revenue is derived from traffic fines
- Provides for periodic
testing and calibration of all devices itself as prescribed by the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
- Provides that officer(s)
using the devise must be visible to the motoring public
- Violations under 10 MPH
over speed limit will not receive points
- Local Ordinance required
to enforce
- Signs indicating
detection of speed violations must be posted on main arteries in to the
municipality to advice the motoring public
- Legislation is supported
by not only police organizations, but also local government associations
such as PA State Association of Boroughs, PA State Association of Township
Supervisors, PA League of Cities and Municipalities, PA State Association
of Township Commissioners as well as MADD, the general public and many
local community elected officials.
- Developed by the state
and local law enforcement community in conjunction with the General
Assembly who initially were not in support of the use of radar by local
police.
|
