Clayda Lozoya was walking on the sidewalk with her 4 year old son and pushing her 7 month old in a stroller, when he was struck and killed by an SUV. The driver of the SUV had just dropped off her child at the Westwind Middle School Academy and was exiting the parking lot when she struck the stroller. Lozoya was able to push her older child out of the way, but the stroller was pulled under the vehicle. The baby was pronounced dead at the scene.
According to reports the driver may have looked left but there was no mention that she looked right--which is the direction Lozoya and her children were coming from. As of yet there have been no charges pressed against the driver of the SUV who, per reports, was emotionally devastated.
There are many things about this case that concern me but a couple I really feel need to be addressed here. For one, I recently posted a blog about school zones, and mentioned the guidelines established by the Arizona Motor Vehicle Department. However, how can we expect drivers to follow the guidelines if the school zone is not posted? I know that the driver in this incident was well aware of the school zone, considering her child attends that school, but it could have been someone else. Rick Mata, the baby’s father stated “Every school out there has a sign that says 15 miles per hour, why not right here?
Another concern I have is that as drivers, we all need to “know our cars”. SUV’s and trucks are taller than most cars, thus, often you may have a blind spot directly in front of you. It is possible that a person, especially a small child, can be right in front of your car and you wouldn’t see them. ALL DRIVERS: When leaving a parking lot, ESPECIALLY IN A SCHOOL ZONE OR FROM A SCHOOL, drivers should always be watching for children and pedestrians, and should always be traveling at a slow speed. You can’t predict the actions of a young child any better than anyone else. CAUTION is the rule! There are no exceptions here!!
I do not know all of the details of this case, but can surmise what occurred here: Driver inattention, and perhaps, mommy inattention. I was watching the news that night and saw the tearful and horrifically emotional interview with the mother of the deceased 7 month old. Nothing will bring her baby back. Attention—Attention—Attention would have prevented this horrible tragedy. A few more seconds only, yet, a life lost forever, and no less than 2 families destroyed by this incident.
Everything about this accident is disturbing. Our hearts go out to all those affected.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Collision with School Bus in North Phoenix Claims One
This is the story we never want to hear. One teenager is dead and another critically injured after their vehicle collided with a school bus.
I have been writing about driving behavior in school zones for months now, ever since school started. Nevertheless, at 7:35 this morning, the bus driver was beginning his pickup route. He was traveling westbound on Union Hills with an empty bus and was turning left onto 12th street when a Volkswagon hatchback traveling eastbound struck the side of his bus. The Volkswagon ended up crushed underneath the bus. The teenage driver was pronounced dead at the scene and the passenger was taken to the hospital in serious condition.
A parent who lives in the area said that neighbors have complained about speeding and reckless driving on Union Hills, especially between 12th street and 20th street. North Canyon High School is at 17th street and Union Hills, therefore I can’t help but jump to the conclusion that a lot of the speeding is done by the high school students. I am sure that complaints like these are common in areas with schools, especially high schools. I was a high school student and I remember how excited I was to have a car and how much fun it was. I wasn’t necessarily reckless or careless, however, at the time I just felt carefree. I don’t think the friends of these teenagers feel “carefree” right now.
I am curious for how long, how often, and to whom these people have been complaining. I wonder if they have been complaining to the city, and if so has the city responded in any way? For example, lowering the speed limit or posting an officer to monitor the situation. I wonder if they have been complaining to the school, and if so has the school responded in any way? For example, communicating with the students about safe driving and informing parents of the problems therefore making them aware of the dangers to their children. The lack of such would not necessarily render any of these agencies “legally liable”, but at times like this, the issues are much more important than legal liability. When a life has been lost, the right to make a claim does not really do justice, does it?
As I have said before and will probably say hundreds of times more, we are all responsible for our children’s safety and that does not stop when they become old enough to drive. Yes, it becomes more difficult, and yes, we have to help them in the long run to take this responsibility upon themselves because God knows we won’t be able to take the pain away from them if something like this ever happens to them or one of their friends. We have to figure out ways to impress upon them the dangers of driving without making them terrified to get behind a wheel.
I recall reading a Dear Abbey column when I was young. I have never forgotten it. I think this should be mandatory reading before a teenager gets a driver’s license. It is called “Please God, I’m Only 17”. Here it is:
PLEASE GOD, I’M ONLY 17!
"The day I died was an ordinary school day. How I wish I had taken the bus! But I was to cool for the bus. I remember how I wheedled the car out of Mom, "SPECIAL FAVOR", I pleaded, "All the Kids drive." When the 2:50 bell rang, I threw all my books in the locker. I was free until 8:40 tomorrow morning! I ran to the parking lot....excited at the thought of driving a car and being my own boss. Free!
"It doesn't matter how the accident happened. I was goofing off...going too fast, taking crazy chances, but I was enjoying my freedom and having fun. The last thing I remember was passing an old lady who seemed to be going awfully slow. I heard the deafening crash and felt a terrific jolt. Glass and steel flew everywhere. My whole body seemed to be turning inside out. I heard myself scream.
"Suddenly I awakened. It was very quiet, a police officer was standing over me. Then I saw the doctor. My body was mangled, I was saturated with blood. Pieces of jagged glass were sticking out all over. Strange that I couldn't feel anything.
"Hey, don't pull that sheet over my head. I can't be dead. I'm only seventeen, I've got a date tonight. I'm supposed to grow up and have a wonderful life. I haven't lived yet. I can't be dead.
"Later I was placed in a drawer. My folks had to identify me. Why did they have to see me like this? Why did I have to look at Mother's eyes when she faced the most terrible ordeal of her life? Father suddenly looked like an old man. He told the man in charge, "Yes, He is my son".
"The funeral was a weird experience. I saw all my relatives and friends walk toward the casket. They passed bye, one by one, and looked at me with the saddest eyes I've ever seen. Some of my buddies were crying. A few of the girls touched my hand and sobbed as they walked away.
"Please...Somebody...WAKE ME UP! GET ME OUT OF HERE! I can't bear to see my Mother and Father so broken up. My grandparents are so wracked with grief they can barely walk. My brothers are like zombies. They move like robots. In a daze, everybody! No one can believe this. And..., I can't believe it either.
"Please don't bury me! I'm not dead! I have a lot of living to do! I want to laugh and run again. I want to sing and dance again. Please don't put me in the ground. I promise if you give me just one more chance, God, I'll be the most careful driver.
Please God, I'm only seventeen!"
I have been writing about driving behavior in school zones for months now, ever since school started. Nevertheless, at 7:35 this morning, the bus driver was beginning his pickup route. He was traveling westbound on Union Hills with an empty bus and was turning left onto 12th street when a Volkswagon hatchback traveling eastbound struck the side of his bus. The Volkswagon ended up crushed underneath the bus. The teenage driver was pronounced dead at the scene and the passenger was taken to the hospital in serious condition.
A parent who lives in the area said that neighbors have complained about speeding and reckless driving on Union Hills, especially between 12th street and 20th street. North Canyon High School is at 17th street and Union Hills, therefore I can’t help but jump to the conclusion that a lot of the speeding is done by the high school students. I am sure that complaints like these are common in areas with schools, especially high schools. I was a high school student and I remember how excited I was to have a car and how much fun it was. I wasn’t necessarily reckless or careless, however, at the time I just felt carefree. I don’t think the friends of these teenagers feel “carefree” right now.
I am curious for how long, how often, and to whom these people have been complaining. I wonder if they have been complaining to the city, and if so has the city responded in any way? For example, lowering the speed limit or posting an officer to monitor the situation. I wonder if they have been complaining to the school, and if so has the school responded in any way? For example, communicating with the students about safe driving and informing parents of the problems therefore making them aware of the dangers to their children. The lack of such would not necessarily render any of these agencies “legally liable”, but at times like this, the issues are much more important than legal liability. When a life has been lost, the right to make a claim does not really do justice, does it?
As I have said before and will probably say hundreds of times more, we are all responsible for our children’s safety and that does not stop when they become old enough to drive. Yes, it becomes more difficult, and yes, we have to help them in the long run to take this responsibility upon themselves because God knows we won’t be able to take the pain away from them if something like this ever happens to them or one of their friends. We have to figure out ways to impress upon them the dangers of driving without making them terrified to get behind a wheel.
I recall reading a Dear Abbey column when I was young. I have never forgotten it. I think this should be mandatory reading before a teenager gets a driver’s license. It is called “Please God, I’m Only 17”. Here it is:
PLEASE GOD, I’M ONLY 17!
"The day I died was an ordinary school day. How I wish I had taken the bus! But I was to cool for the bus. I remember how I wheedled the car out of Mom, "SPECIAL FAVOR", I pleaded, "All the Kids drive." When the 2:50 bell rang, I threw all my books in the locker. I was free until 8:40 tomorrow morning! I ran to the parking lot....excited at the thought of driving a car and being my own boss. Free!
"It doesn't matter how the accident happened. I was goofing off...going too fast, taking crazy chances, but I was enjoying my freedom and having fun. The last thing I remember was passing an old lady who seemed to be going awfully slow. I heard the deafening crash and felt a terrific jolt. Glass and steel flew everywhere. My whole body seemed to be turning inside out. I heard myself scream.
"Suddenly I awakened. It was very quiet, a police officer was standing over me. Then I saw the doctor. My body was mangled, I was saturated with blood. Pieces of jagged glass were sticking out all over. Strange that I couldn't feel anything.
"Hey, don't pull that sheet over my head. I can't be dead. I'm only seventeen, I've got a date tonight. I'm supposed to grow up and have a wonderful life. I haven't lived yet. I can't be dead.
"Later I was placed in a drawer. My folks had to identify me. Why did they have to see me like this? Why did I have to look at Mother's eyes when she faced the most terrible ordeal of her life? Father suddenly looked like an old man. He told the man in charge, "Yes, He is my son".
"The funeral was a weird experience. I saw all my relatives and friends walk toward the casket. They passed bye, one by one, and looked at me with the saddest eyes I've ever seen. Some of my buddies were crying. A few of the girls touched my hand and sobbed as they walked away.
"Please...Somebody...WAKE ME UP! GET ME OUT OF HERE! I can't bear to see my Mother and Father so broken up. My grandparents are so wracked with grief they can barely walk. My brothers are like zombies. They move like robots. In a daze, everybody! No one can believe this. And..., I can't believe it either.
"Please don't bury me! I'm not dead! I have a lot of living to do! I want to laugh and run again. I want to sing and dance again. Please don't put me in the ground. I promise if you give me just one more chance, God, I'll be the most careful driver.
Please God, I'm only seventeen!"
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
New Arizona Law Boosts Burden on Patients Harmed by Medical Negligence
A new Arizona law, sb1018, has shifted the burden of proof in emergency care medical malpractice cases, making it more difficult for patients harmed by emergency procedures to prove their cases.
Previously Arizona law required the injured victims demonstrate that medical malpractice occurred by a “preponderance of the evidence.” Under this standard, an injured person needed only to demonstrate that malpractice was more likely to have occurred than not.
However, under the new law the injured victim must provide “clear and convincing evidence” that malpractice occurred. This is a much higher burden, requiring that the injured person convince the court that it is substantially more likely than not that medical malpractice occurred. This makes it even more difficult for a person injured by medical negligence to prove their case. No other type of civil claim in Arizona has such a demanding standard of proof.
Legal experts say the practical effect of this change will be to reduce the odds that a patient harmed by improper medical procedures will prevail in court. Critics of the law say that as a result of this change, patients harmed by incompetence or negligence will be stuck with both the medical repercussions of the substandard treatment and the financial burdens of future reparative surgeries and therapeutic procedures. In truth, a very large number of people who are injured by a medical mistake will not be able to bring a claim at all, for want of being able to find an attorney to help them. This is the first step in closing the door to the courthouse for an injured victim or their family.
Supporters of the bill claim it will help Arizona attract more emergency room doctors and nurses to the state by lowering the costs of medical malpractice insurance. This is absurd. There is no credible evidence that hospitals cannot attract physicians for the ER, and no evidence that this might otherwise be the case due to potential liability concerns. Indeed, a 2006 study of the shortage of emergency department personnel showed that fear of a lawsuit was a minor aspect of the problem. The research shows that long hours and relatively low pay (i.e. low health insurance reimbursement) play a much larger role in doctors’ reluctance to commit to emergency room care.
The liability protection bill was supported by lobbying efforts by the Arizona Medical Association and the Arizona chapter of the American College of Emergency Physicians. Of course. Doctors, like most people, do not like being told that they have committed a wrong. The role of the civil justice system is to not only to call them out on their wrongdoing, but also to make them (actually, their insurance company) pay for the mistake. However, if they can change the law to make the burden more difficult, they are one step closer to insulating themselves from any liability at all for their mistakes. This new Arizona law takes a big step in that direction.
Doctors don’t like to be told they made a mistake. Insurance companies don’t like to pay money to injured victims. Indeed, often they will do whatever they can to avoid it. Any legislative measures that are taken to curb YOUR rights to sue or recover for the wrongs of others are called “tort reform.” Insurance companies, the medical profession, large businesses and your Congress are trying to make people think that this is a good thing. They want you to believe that they cannot run their businesses in a normal way, or that they cannot compete with other businesses in foreign countries because of the legal system in the United States that holds them accountable for their wrongdoing.
Wait----you mean that our civil justice system in the United States is a means of holding wrongdoers accountable for their conduct???? And, doctors, insurance companies and Congress want you to believe that is a bad thing??? Of course they do, because it helps pass laws like this, which insulate doctors from responsibility for their wrongs and help insurance companies save money when they might otherwise have to pay.
The doctors and their insurers will hail this as a victory. Of course they will—it is a victory for them. But at the same time, as in most things, if there is a winner there is also a loser. The losers in this scenario are the citizens and residents of Arizona. For the most part, this has barred you from the courthouse should you suffer an injury in a hospital emergency room. It always seems OK when the person affected is the other guy. It never hits home until it actually hits home. When that happens, you will surely come to know that this is a bad thing. Unfortunately, it will be too late.
**If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to email Chris Zachar directly at CZachar@zacharlaw.com, or visit our website at http://www.ZacharLawFirm.com .
Previously Arizona law required the injured victims demonstrate that medical malpractice occurred by a “preponderance of the evidence.” Under this standard, an injured person needed only to demonstrate that malpractice was more likely to have occurred than not.
However, under the new law the injured victim must provide “clear and convincing evidence” that malpractice occurred. This is a much higher burden, requiring that the injured person convince the court that it is substantially more likely than not that medical malpractice occurred. This makes it even more difficult for a person injured by medical negligence to prove their case. No other type of civil claim in Arizona has such a demanding standard of proof.
Legal experts say the practical effect of this change will be to reduce the odds that a patient harmed by improper medical procedures will prevail in court. Critics of the law say that as a result of this change, patients harmed by incompetence or negligence will be stuck with both the medical repercussions of the substandard treatment and the financial burdens of future reparative surgeries and therapeutic procedures. In truth, a very large number of people who are injured by a medical mistake will not be able to bring a claim at all, for want of being able to find an attorney to help them. This is the first step in closing the door to the courthouse for an injured victim or their family.
Supporters of the bill claim it will help Arizona attract more emergency room doctors and nurses to the state by lowering the costs of medical malpractice insurance. This is absurd. There is no credible evidence that hospitals cannot attract physicians for the ER, and no evidence that this might otherwise be the case due to potential liability concerns. Indeed, a 2006 study of the shortage of emergency department personnel showed that fear of a lawsuit was a minor aspect of the problem. The research shows that long hours and relatively low pay (i.e. low health insurance reimbursement) play a much larger role in doctors’ reluctance to commit to emergency room care.
The liability protection bill was supported by lobbying efforts by the Arizona Medical Association and the Arizona chapter of the American College of Emergency Physicians. Of course. Doctors, like most people, do not like being told that they have committed a wrong. The role of the civil justice system is to not only to call them out on their wrongdoing, but also to make them (actually, their insurance company) pay for the mistake. However, if they can change the law to make the burden more difficult, they are one step closer to insulating themselves from any liability at all for their mistakes. This new Arizona law takes a big step in that direction.
Doctors don’t like to be told they made a mistake. Insurance companies don’t like to pay money to injured victims. Indeed, often they will do whatever they can to avoid it. Any legislative measures that are taken to curb YOUR rights to sue or recover for the wrongs of others are called “tort reform.” Insurance companies, the medical profession, large businesses and your Congress are trying to make people think that this is a good thing. They want you to believe that they cannot run their businesses in a normal way, or that they cannot compete with other businesses in foreign countries because of the legal system in the United States that holds them accountable for their wrongdoing.
Wait----you mean that our civil justice system in the United States is a means of holding wrongdoers accountable for their conduct???? And, doctors, insurance companies and Congress want you to believe that is a bad thing??? Of course they do, because it helps pass laws like this, which insulate doctors from responsibility for their wrongs and help insurance companies save money when they might otherwise have to pay.
The doctors and their insurers will hail this as a victory. Of course they will—it is a victory for them. But at the same time, as in most things, if there is a winner there is also a loser. The losers in this scenario are the citizens and residents of Arizona. For the most part, this has barred you from the courthouse should you suffer an injury in a hospital emergency room. It always seems OK when the person affected is the other guy. It never hits home until it actually hits home. When that happens, you will surely come to know that this is a bad thing. Unfortunately, it will be too late.
**If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to email Chris Zachar directly at CZachar@zacharlaw.com, or visit our website at http://www.ZacharLawFirm.com .
Friday, September 18, 2009
Los Angeles Water Main Break
Wow! A fire truck responding to a pipe break fell into a sinkhole Tuesday morning. Apparently, the fire engine was heading towards a call when they came upon running water on the street. They proceeded to back up the engine because they were worried about the stability of the ground, nevertheless, the front end of the 22-ton truck fell into the sinkhole and began filling with water. The firefighters inside were able to climb to safety.
It appears here that the hole was caused by a burst water main. According to the Associated Press the water main, which was part of the original water system and dated back to 1914, was slated for repairs before it burst.
Three days prior and approximately two miles away another main had broken. It is unknown yet whether the two are related. The main that broke on Saturday was also part of the original system and had already been slated for repairs as well.
Liability? It depends upon many factors. Should the mains have been replaced well before these broke? Why was that not done? Were there any measures taken to determine the integrity of the pipes? Were there any measures taken to remedy the condition before they broke? How much time passed between the pipes breaking and the incident wherein someone was hurt or someone’s property was damaged? Could said damage have been avoided with a better response from the City, and more warnings or safeguards to motorists?
Sometimes in situations like this the city will claim “immunity” on the grounds that it was performing a “vital government function”. (Indeed, I would argue that they failed to perform a vital government function.) The doctrine of sovereign immunity provides that governments are immune from suit by private parties. The government can waive immunity however. In this area, it is hard to find a consistency in how it is applied and to what level.
Thank goodness the firefighters were able to escape uninjured and I haven’t heard of any reported injuries. However, I can imagine that property damage costs will be high. According to reports, cars were swept down streets, people were forced out of their homes, and yards were littered with debris. One man estimated his losses at $10,000 and he like many, expects to be reimbursed by the city.
If you have suffered damages due to an event such as this, your first call should be to your own insurance agent, to see if the insurance protection that YOU pay for provides coverage for your loss. Should you have any problems in dealing with your insurance professionals (not uncommon, in my experience), seek legal counsel in your area.
It appears here that the hole was caused by a burst water main. According to the Associated Press the water main, which was part of the original water system and dated back to 1914, was slated for repairs before it burst.
Three days prior and approximately two miles away another main had broken. It is unknown yet whether the two are related. The main that broke on Saturday was also part of the original system and had already been slated for repairs as well.
Liability? It depends upon many factors. Should the mains have been replaced well before these broke? Why was that not done? Were there any measures taken to determine the integrity of the pipes? Were there any measures taken to remedy the condition before they broke? How much time passed between the pipes breaking and the incident wherein someone was hurt or someone’s property was damaged? Could said damage have been avoided with a better response from the City, and more warnings or safeguards to motorists?
Sometimes in situations like this the city will claim “immunity” on the grounds that it was performing a “vital government function”. (Indeed, I would argue that they failed to perform a vital government function.) The doctrine of sovereign immunity provides that governments are immune from suit by private parties. The government can waive immunity however. In this area, it is hard to find a consistency in how it is applied and to what level.
Thank goodness the firefighters were able to escape uninjured and I haven’t heard of any reported injuries. However, I can imagine that property damage costs will be high. According to reports, cars were swept down streets, people were forced out of their homes, and yards were littered with debris. One man estimated his losses at $10,000 and he like many, expects to be reimbursed by the city.
If you have suffered damages due to an event such as this, your first call should be to your own insurance agent, to see if the insurance protection that YOU pay for provides coverage for your loss. Should you have any problems in dealing with your insurance professionals (not uncommon, in my experience), seek legal counsel in your area.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
14-year-Old Bicyclist Struck and Pinned by Truck in Phoenix
Thursday afternoon, a truck hit a teenage boy on his bike near 43rd avenue. The boy ended up pinned beneath the truck. The victim was flown to the hospital afterward.
No further information as to the boy’s condition has been released. We all hope he has a full recovery.
Considering this accident happened about 4:00 pm, I assume the boy was either going home from school or from an after school activity. As I previously mentioned in another post, now that school is back in session we all have to make adjustments when driving to allow for the increase in not only automobile traffic, but school bus traffic, bicycle traffic, and pedestrian traffic as well.
I don’t believe this boy was in a school zone however, now is as good a time as any to go over this, especially considering this accident occurred at a time when a lot of school children are still out on the roads.
Everyone knows this is important--whether they actually have children or not—to be on the lookout for children in or near the roads. Police departments throughout Arizona are taking special precautions to help. In some school districts, they are even putting officers on the buses who can then radio ahead to a waiting officer when they witness a violation. Trust me--you do NOT want to get a ticket in a school zone, in which the fines can run as high as $560.
Here is a list of school zone guidelines established by the Arizona MVD:
• Permanent five-sided school zone signs on the side of roadways warn drivers that children may be crossing at any time.
• Portable signs placed in the center of the roadway must be obeyed.
• The maximum speed from the first sign to the last sign in a school zone is 15 mph.
• Passing another vehicle while in a school crossing zone is prohibited.
• There often will be a crossing guard to assist schoolchildren in getting from one side of the road to the other. You must follow this individual’s instructions and you must come to a complete stop when any person is in the crosswalk.
There are a couple things I do not think everyone understands about these guidelines. No passing in school zone does not mean going around another vehicle, it means that your bumper can't pass any other car's bumper going in your same direction. No matter how slow another vehicle is going, you cannot pass it! I would say that every single day I drive in a school zone, and every single day I see someone violate this law. Also, if a person is in a school zone crosswalk, they must be completely out of the crosswalk before any vehicle in either direction may proceed.
For reasons which should be clear, there is zero tolerance for violations of Arizona in school zones. Compliance with the law may delay you by what—15 seconds or so? My suggestion is to obey these laws. The interference into your day will be minimal. The results, however, will be immeasurable.
**If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to email Chris Zachar directly at CZachar@zacharlaw.com, or visit our website at http://www.ZacharLawFirm.com .
No further information as to the boy’s condition has been released. We all hope he has a full recovery.
Considering this accident happened about 4:00 pm, I assume the boy was either going home from school or from an after school activity. As I previously mentioned in another post, now that school is back in session we all have to make adjustments when driving to allow for the increase in not only automobile traffic, but school bus traffic, bicycle traffic, and pedestrian traffic as well.
I don’t believe this boy was in a school zone however, now is as good a time as any to go over this, especially considering this accident occurred at a time when a lot of school children are still out on the roads.
Everyone knows this is important--whether they actually have children or not—to be on the lookout for children in or near the roads. Police departments throughout Arizona are taking special precautions to help. In some school districts, they are even putting officers on the buses who can then radio ahead to a waiting officer when they witness a violation. Trust me--you do NOT want to get a ticket in a school zone, in which the fines can run as high as $560.
Here is a list of school zone guidelines established by the Arizona MVD:
• Permanent five-sided school zone signs on the side of roadways warn drivers that children may be crossing at any time.
• Portable signs placed in the center of the roadway must be obeyed.
• The maximum speed from the first sign to the last sign in a school zone is 15 mph.
• Passing another vehicle while in a school crossing zone is prohibited.
• There often will be a crossing guard to assist schoolchildren in getting from one side of the road to the other. You must follow this individual’s instructions and you must come to a complete stop when any person is in the crosswalk.
There are a couple things I do not think everyone understands about these guidelines. No passing in school zone does not mean going around another vehicle, it means that your bumper can't pass any other car's bumper going in your same direction. No matter how slow another vehicle is going, you cannot pass it! I would say that every single day I drive in a school zone, and every single day I see someone violate this law. Also, if a person is in a school zone crosswalk, they must be completely out of the crosswalk before any vehicle in either direction may proceed.
For reasons which should be clear, there is zero tolerance for violations of Arizona in school zones. Compliance with the law may delay you by what—15 seconds or so? My suggestion is to obey these laws. The interference into your day will be minimal. The results, however, will be immeasurable.
**If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to email Chris Zachar directly at CZachar@zacharlaw.com, or visit our website at http://www.ZacharLawFirm.com .
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Banning Handheld Devices While Driving in Arizona
I applaud the efforts of the Texas legislature, who gave final approval to House Bill 55 in May of this year. The bill outlaws use of handheld devices in school crossing zones. If people believe that this issue is dangerous enough to want to protect our children from it, shouldn’t we want to protect all people from it?
I recently blogged about texting while driving, and after everything I learned while researching for that, I am very disheartened that we haven’t been able to pass more legislation banning or restricting handheld devices while driving here in Arizona.
In my last blog I mentioned a video that was circulating, http://www.engadget.com/tag/textingwhiledriving/, if you haven’t watched it yet please do but remember it is very graphic. However, I believe that it hits the nail right on the head. I think every one of our legislators should watch it.
Recently, the national association representing state highway safety officials has reversed its stand on text messaging while driving. Now---hopefully, we will see more legislation actually being approved. The Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA) had stated earlier that laws banning texting while driving would prove impossible to enforce, and therefore did not support them. Are you kidding me????? They are refusing to pass a law because enforcement will be difficult??? Um, OK---so the hell what!!!! They said the same thing about seat belts, probably the same thing about alcohol consumption (the open container law), and I am sure there are others. Pass the law!!!!! A good percentage of the people will stop just because it is the law! Others will not, but I am sure that those others will disobey the law whatever it might be.
Recently, GHSA Chairman Vernon F. Betkey Jr. stated, “We want to send the strongest message possible about texting behind the wheel – it is dangerous and should not be tolerated.” The GHSA now points out that there were challenges to seat belt laws also before they became common practice. OK---duh!
Look at the Arizona Driver’s License Manual. In section 1, it states “You should be able to operate the horn and each of the other instruments without taking your eyes off of the road.” In section 2, Safe Driving Practices, it states “Defensive driving means being constantly aware of the driving conditions,” and “You must develop the habit of keeping your mind on driving.” It also states “there is a potential accident in every minor distraction.”
I really cannot believe that we are all in THAT big of a hurry that we have to immediately respond to that text at the moment we receive it. I have to admit—I have done this while driving---until I watched the above video. My wife now has express permission to take my phone away from me if she sees otherwise. If the Arizona legislature is too damn dumb to take the right steps, then it is up to those of us with enough common sense to police ourselves. Please watch the link above. If afterward, you still think it is OK to text while driving, here is my email address CZachar@zacharlaw.com. Please send me an email when you are on the road, and I will make sure that I get the hell off.
I recently blogged about texting while driving, and after everything I learned while researching for that, I am very disheartened that we haven’t been able to pass more legislation banning or restricting handheld devices while driving here in Arizona.
In my last blog I mentioned a video that was circulating, http://www.engadget.com/tag/textingwhiledriving/, if you haven’t watched it yet please do but remember it is very graphic. However, I believe that it hits the nail right on the head. I think every one of our legislators should watch it.
Recently, the national association representing state highway safety officials has reversed its stand on text messaging while driving. Now---hopefully, we will see more legislation actually being approved. The Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA) had stated earlier that laws banning texting while driving would prove impossible to enforce, and therefore did not support them. Are you kidding me????? They are refusing to pass a law because enforcement will be difficult??? Um, OK---so the hell what!!!! They said the same thing about seat belts, probably the same thing about alcohol consumption (the open container law), and I am sure there are others. Pass the law!!!!! A good percentage of the people will stop just because it is the law! Others will not, but I am sure that those others will disobey the law whatever it might be.
Recently, GHSA Chairman Vernon F. Betkey Jr. stated, “We want to send the strongest message possible about texting behind the wheel – it is dangerous and should not be tolerated.” The GHSA now points out that there were challenges to seat belt laws also before they became common practice. OK---duh!
Look at the Arizona Driver’s License Manual. In section 1, it states “You should be able to operate the horn and each of the other instruments without taking your eyes off of the road.” In section 2, Safe Driving Practices, it states “Defensive driving means being constantly aware of the driving conditions,” and “You must develop the habit of keeping your mind on driving.” It also states “there is a potential accident in every minor distraction.”
I really cannot believe that we are all in THAT big of a hurry that we have to immediately respond to that text at the moment we receive it. I have to admit—I have done this while driving---until I watched the above video. My wife now has express permission to take my phone away from me if she sees otherwise. If the Arizona legislature is too damn dumb to take the right steps, then it is up to those of us with enough common sense to police ourselves. Please watch the link above. If afterward, you still think it is OK to text while driving, here is my email address CZachar@zacharlaw.com. Please send me an email when you are on the road, and I will make sure that I get the hell off.
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Seat Belts on School Buses – A More Difficult Debate Than Imagined
When the question of seat belts on school buses came to me I immediately thought, of course there should be seat belts on school buses! I couldn’t think of a reason not to have them. However, upon further investigation it is no wonder this debate has been ongoing for as long as I can remember. A little research really opens up the debate.
Before diving into this topic I would like to first say that at this point I no longer have a definite opinion on whether or not we should have seat belts on school buses and I will not have one until I am privy to a study that actually addresses and evaluates a better variety of the different types of crash configurations.
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), school buses use a safety feature called compartmentalization. Compartmentalization, likened by many to an egg carton, involves the actual design of the school bus. Seats are made with padded, flexible, shock-absorbent backs that are supposed to be tall enough to prevent children from flying out of the compartment. There are strict federal guidelines regulating the strengths of the seats and their installation. Compartmentalization seems to have very strong advocates and an equal strength in its opponents. Where my actual concerns come into play are in the validity of the information represented by the NHTSA.
Normally, I tend to trust information provided by organizations like the NHTSA, considering it is a part of the U.S. Department of Transportation and it’s focus is to “save lives, prevent injuries and reduce traffic-related health care and other economic costs.” However, given the fact that it is a governmental agency, there is little doubt in my mind that it has its own agenda. For instance, as I was researching this topic I came across an allegation that the NHTSA failed to administer and or report on certain types of crashes where compartmentalization might fail. Why would they fail to include all relevant data? I then came across a report by the NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board) that states that “Current compartmentalization is incomplete in that it does not protect school bus passengers during lateral impacts with vehicles of large mass and in rollovers, because in such accidents, passengers do not always remain completely within the seating compartment.” I continued my research…..
According to the National Coalition for School Bus Safety, compartmentalization is incomplete because it does not include a side panel or a lap belt and the seat back height is still not as high as the engineers recommend. This results in compartmentalization that works fairly well for front-end crashes but not for side impacts or rollovers. If this is the case, one might reasonably start to wonder if the real reason we are not adding seat belts to our school buses is cost.
It was hard to find a true estimate of what it would cost to add seat belts to a school bus. I found cost estimates ranging from $1,000 per bus up to $10,000 per bus. In addition, there are comments that adding seat belts would take up space and diminish seating capacity (a weak argument in my opinion). Many seem to think we would also have to pay the bus drivers for about another half-an-hour of work due to time delays required for children to put on their seat belts and pay for another employee to monitor that all children are using the seat belts and properly. (Parents---are you listening???) I have no problem paying the driver. I really don’t think that an additional employee to monitor this is necessary.
Compartmentalization advocates also tout many other reasons not to add seat belts to school buses, many of which mirror the beliefs of those who oppose seat belt use in automobiles. Some believe we will not be able to enforce proper usage of the seat belts by children. Some believe seat belts may trap panicked or disoriented children after a crash causing further injury especially in the cases involving water or fire. Some have gone so far as to worry that seat belts would be used by some children as weapons. I am sure there are a good many more reasons we could come up with, although, none of them necessarily good. The question is: Does this risk of no seat belts on buses outweigh the risk of having them?
Opponents and advocates alike do seem to agree upon the fact that school buses are among the safest modes of transportation on public roadways available to our children. Every school year in the United States 450,000 public school buses transport about 23.5 million children and travel over 4.3 billion miles. Less than eight passengers a year die in school bus crashes and approximately 8,000 are injured every year in these crashes. The fatality rate for cars is 1.5 per 100 million vehicle miles traveled (vmt), 800% greater than school buses, which have a vmt of .2 per 100 million. Does this mean that school buses cannot be made safer than they are? I think not, but until we can figure out the correct way to make them safer we have to continue to study various methods.
There happens to be a pilot study entering its final year now assessing lap/shoulder seat belts on buses in Alabama. Everyone including the NTSB and the NHSA are waiting for the results of this study. Hopefully, it brings us enough valuable information into this dilemma to finally commit to what we can all agree to be the safest route to take for our children. And in turn, thereafter, I hope to return to this topic with a well thought out opinion on what I believe to be the best safest measure to take for our children.
We all know no matter what measures we take accidents will never go away completely and we must do our best to protect our children. It is not a perfect world, and we cannot make it so. Everything has a risk/benefit quotient. Regardless, it is nice to know that the issue of additional safety on school buses is being continuously debated, and studied.
**If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to email Chris Zachar directly at Czachar@zacharlaw.com, or visit our website at http://www.ZacharLawFirm.com .
Before diving into this topic I would like to first say that at this point I no longer have a definite opinion on whether or not we should have seat belts on school buses and I will not have one until I am privy to a study that actually addresses and evaluates a better variety of the different types of crash configurations.
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), school buses use a safety feature called compartmentalization. Compartmentalization, likened by many to an egg carton, involves the actual design of the school bus. Seats are made with padded, flexible, shock-absorbent backs that are supposed to be tall enough to prevent children from flying out of the compartment. There are strict federal guidelines regulating the strengths of the seats and their installation. Compartmentalization seems to have very strong advocates and an equal strength in its opponents. Where my actual concerns come into play are in the validity of the information represented by the NHTSA.
Normally, I tend to trust information provided by organizations like the NHTSA, considering it is a part of the U.S. Department of Transportation and it’s focus is to “save lives, prevent injuries and reduce traffic-related health care and other economic costs.” However, given the fact that it is a governmental agency, there is little doubt in my mind that it has its own agenda. For instance, as I was researching this topic I came across an allegation that the NHTSA failed to administer and or report on certain types of crashes where compartmentalization might fail. Why would they fail to include all relevant data? I then came across a report by the NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board) that states that “Current compartmentalization is incomplete in that it does not protect school bus passengers during lateral impacts with vehicles of large mass and in rollovers, because in such accidents, passengers do not always remain completely within the seating compartment.” I continued my research…..
According to the National Coalition for School Bus Safety, compartmentalization is incomplete because it does not include a side panel or a lap belt and the seat back height is still not as high as the engineers recommend. This results in compartmentalization that works fairly well for front-end crashes but not for side impacts or rollovers. If this is the case, one might reasonably start to wonder if the real reason we are not adding seat belts to our school buses is cost.
It was hard to find a true estimate of what it would cost to add seat belts to a school bus. I found cost estimates ranging from $1,000 per bus up to $10,000 per bus. In addition, there are comments that adding seat belts would take up space and diminish seating capacity (a weak argument in my opinion). Many seem to think we would also have to pay the bus drivers for about another half-an-hour of work due to time delays required for children to put on their seat belts and pay for another employee to monitor that all children are using the seat belts and properly. (Parents---are you listening???) I have no problem paying the driver. I really don’t think that an additional employee to monitor this is necessary.
Compartmentalization advocates also tout many other reasons not to add seat belts to school buses, many of which mirror the beliefs of those who oppose seat belt use in automobiles. Some believe we will not be able to enforce proper usage of the seat belts by children. Some believe seat belts may trap panicked or disoriented children after a crash causing further injury especially in the cases involving water or fire. Some have gone so far as to worry that seat belts would be used by some children as weapons. I am sure there are a good many more reasons we could come up with, although, none of them necessarily good. The question is: Does this risk of no seat belts on buses outweigh the risk of having them?
Opponents and advocates alike do seem to agree upon the fact that school buses are among the safest modes of transportation on public roadways available to our children. Every school year in the United States 450,000 public school buses transport about 23.5 million children and travel over 4.3 billion miles. Less than eight passengers a year die in school bus crashes and approximately 8,000 are injured every year in these crashes. The fatality rate for cars is 1.5 per 100 million vehicle miles traveled (vmt), 800% greater than school buses, which have a vmt of .2 per 100 million. Does this mean that school buses cannot be made safer than they are? I think not, but until we can figure out the correct way to make them safer we have to continue to study various methods.
There happens to be a pilot study entering its final year now assessing lap/shoulder seat belts on buses in Alabama. Everyone including the NTSB and the NHSA are waiting for the results of this study. Hopefully, it brings us enough valuable information into this dilemma to finally commit to what we can all agree to be the safest route to take for our children. And in turn, thereafter, I hope to return to this topic with a well thought out opinion on what I believe to be the best safest measure to take for our children.
We all know no matter what measures we take accidents will never go away completely and we must do our best to protect our children. It is not a perfect world, and we cannot make it so. Everything has a risk/benefit quotient. Regardless, it is nice to know that the issue of additional safety on school buses is being continuously debated, and studied.
**If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to email Chris Zachar directly at Czachar@zacharlaw.com, or visit our website at http://www.ZacharLawFirm.com .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
