Tag: Motor Vehicle Accidents

California traffic safety officials would likely be most happy if they could interpret current accident and fatality statistics as merely a temporary aberrational departure — a hiccup, if you will — in an otherwise steady pattern of improving roadway safety.

They can’t do that easily, though, because traffic-related deaths in California are unquestionably on the rise, and have been so over consecutive measuring periods in recent years.

That spells upswing, and it is notably discernible — and troubling.

“We want to keep it [the pattern showing a persistent rise in roadway deaths] as minimal as possible,” says one state safety official.

Hopefully that is a doable proposition, although relevant accident statistics indicate that it might be a difficult task.

Here’s one such number: State authorities say that motor vehicle-related fatalities spiked by 13 percent over a recent three-year period. They expect that upward trend to remain apparent when new traffic numbers for last year are fully crunched and analyzed.

Moreover, that rising death toll has followed a period during which fatal accidents were decreasing in the state at an impressive rate. As one media article addressing the subject matter notes, fatalities “dropped a dramatic 36 percent between 2006 and 2010.”

Given the state’s comparatively heavy traffic volume, road fatality numbers are obviously far from insignificant in any year, regardless of what trending data are showing.

Officials note, for example, that 2,739 people died in vehicle-related crashes in California during 2010. That number rose to 3,104 in 2013.

Driving is obviously — and literally in the most fundamental sense — deadly serious business that demands unflagging vigilance. We wish all our readers routinely safe outcomes when they are behind the wheel and negotiating streets and highways across the state.

Those frantic, fleeting moments in the wake of a car accident will leave you intimidated and scared. What are you supposed to do? How are you supposed to react? Have people been injured in the wreck? So much is happening so quickly that it is understandable to freeze and not have the slightest clue how to react.

To lead things off in this discussion about what to do after a car accident, let’s talk about something you shouldn’t do: flee the scene of the wreck. Doing so is a criminal act, and it deprives people who have been injured in the wreck valuable aid that you could be providing them. Never flee from the scene of a car accident in which you were involved.

Now that you’ve remained at the scene, there are a few constructive steps you can take. The first, as we mentioned above, is to check on the other drivers in the wreck to see if they are okay. If they need medical assistance, call 911 and follow any instructions that emergency responders give you over the phone. Every little bit of aid that you provide could help save a person’s life.

Once you have completed this step, or if your accident isn’t serious enough to warrant immediate medical attention, you can survey the scene and collect information. Take photos of the crash scene and talk to some of the witnesses (if there are any) of the crash. They could provide valuable information. Get their contact information and statements, and save that information for when you are dealing with insurance companies or a case in civil court.

Source: FindLaw, “After a Car Accident: First Steps,” Accessed Aug. 27, 2015

It is hardly surprising that an accident involving multiple vehicles and resulting in 10 fatalities has been under continuing study by federal accident investigators since its occurrence last year.

The results of a lengthy and comprehensive analysis of a head-on collision between a commercial truck and a motorcoach bus in northern California last April concluded with a recent safety report issued by the National Transportation Safety Board.

The NTSB states that the accident continues to be a puzzle of major proportions. Safety experts have been unable to pinpoint any reason why the FedEx driver of a tractor trailer crossed over a nearly 60-foot-wide interstate median and rammed a bus carrying dozens of passengers.

Both drivers died in the crash, along with eight bus passengers. Two occupants of a passenger car that was also hit by the truck were injured, along with 37 motorcoach passengers.

The sheer scope and tragedy marking the accident understandably yielded the NTSB’s closest scrutiny, and what the agency noted in its post-crash report was revealing.

For starters, neither commercial vehicle had an on-board data event recorder (the so-called “black box”), which the NTSB found lamentable. Board Chairman Christopher A. Hart stated that that NTSB has been strongly pushing for universal installation of that equipment on all commercial vehicles for more than a decade, but to no avail.

The NTSB also noted that emergency lighting on the bus was inadequate and that lack of a second emergency exit door hindered post-crash evacuations. The board recommended that federal safety regulators address such deficiencies, as well as upgrade flammability standards operative to commercial buses and better ensure that operators conduct pre-trip safety briefings for passengers.

Source: Claims Journal, “NTSB calls for black boxes, safety improvements for motorcoaches,” NTSB cited as source, July 20, 2015

Fast answer to the above-posed headline question: No, they do not.

The seat belt that most drivers throughout California and across the United States are of course most accustomed to is the same one that dad, mom and perhaps even the grandparents used many years back (with some modifications).

That is, the quintessential and long-tenured American seat belt has some give to it as a vehicle occupant is lurching forward, but only to a point. At that point, the belt stops a driver or passenger being propelled forward — suddenly and completely.

There can be an occasional trade off with that, of course, with the good-news, bad-news scenario being one that most motorists are likely quite happy to live with (quite literally).

The bad news: Persons using the restraint can sometimes suffer material injuries to their chest area and ribs, even breaking the latter.

The good news: Those ribs might hurt, but the fact that a driver or passenger stopped hurtling forward at a given point likely stopped — as it does in many vehicle accidents each year — a body from colliding with a vehicle’s windshield.

Relatively new technology is now featured in some vehicles that contrasts with that employed in what might be termed the “classic” seat belt. So-called “spool out” belts allow for the continuous forward movement of a vehicle occupant, without a finite and sudden stop point, the intent being that an air bag will timely employ to intercept the forward-moving body.

“The seat belt actually gives you up to what’s supposed to be a waiting air bag,” says one commentator.

That is of course ideal — when it works. When the timing isn’t perfect, though, the implications for serious and even fatal seat belt-related accident outcomes are crystal clear.

Reportedly, at least a score of lawsuits have been filed in recent years alleging that injuries were caused by spool-out belts.

Source: NBC Los Angeles, “Seat belt technology designed to improve safety blamed for some severe injuries,” Amy Corral and Randy Mac, July 1, 2015

Do you like scary rides?

Here’s an absolutely free one provided many millions of times each day to people across Southern California and the rest of the state: being a driver or passenger in a moderately sized car and having a 40-ton 18-wheel commercial truck whiz by you at 70 miles per hour.

Those things are big, indeed, and we know that all our readers readily appreciate the damage they can do when they are involved in accidents with other vehicles.

The occupants of those “other vehicles” invariably lose. In a best-case scenario, no lives are lost and property damage is minimal. Unfortunately, though, and in most instances, the consequences of a car-truck collision are flatly dire.

Safety regulators well appreciate, of course, the outsized dimensions and singular safety considerations inherent with vehicles like tractor trailers and other super-sized cargo carriers.

One specific concern that was recently expressed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration relates to the dangerous nexus existing between high speed and tire blowouts.

In a nutshell: Evidence shows that the risks of a tire blowing out on a big rig correspond closely to the speed that the vehicle is being driven; the faster the rig is going, the higher the risk of a failing tire and resulting accident.

The NHTSA has a specific response to that problem that it is pushing as a national mandate affecting all commercial trucks, namely this: If the agency has its way, all such vehicles must soon have an electronic speed-limiting device installed that will top off their speed at 70 miles per hour.

Advocates will find that a salutary measure for every state, although the impact will likely be more acutely appreciated in some areas. California state law already has a 70-mph maximum (for rural freeways). Texas, on the other hand, allows truckers to travel as fast as 85 miles per hour in some areas.

Still, it is far from a secret that some truckers in California travel unlawfully fast. A speed governor would eliminate that behavior.

And, concomitantly, it would make driving on state roadways just a bit less exciting for many drivers of passenger vehicles, which is exactly the way they might logically want their driving experience to be.

Source: Yahoo! Finance, “Safety chief wants to cap big rig speeds to fix tire problem,” Meghan Barr and Tom Krisher (AP), April 9, 2015