Safety and Education Committee Report
My Response to Impaired Drivers
As bicyclists, our safety is greatly affected by the actions of other vehicle operators. When involved in an accident we are not protected from injury by our vehicles. Our ability to accelerate and stop is limited and we usually are traveling slower than the other vehicles. We rely on the other vehicle operators to obey the law and act predictably in order to avoid accidents. Impaired operators have a diminished ability to control their vehicles and often the law-abiding bicyclist must suffer the consequences of their actions. We have laws prohibiting the operation of vehicles while impaired. Unfortunately, enforcement of these laws places our police in a difficult position. Following an accident, the investigating officer is forced to make a judgment call under stressful conditions. It is up to him to determine if the operator needs testing for chemical impairment. Some people are very good at concealing their impairment and certain drugs are proven to impair cognitive skills for days. Many substance abusers are very adept at getting sympathy from others. Nobody wants to judge others and be wrong so the police are naturally reluctant to recommend testing. It is virtually impossible to ascertain one’s BAC (Blood Alcohol Content) visually and the appearance of prior drug use is easily concealed. Enforcing our laws is a difficult job and we should not be asking our police to be judges to discover the facts.
The transportation industry has eliminated this problem by requiring drug testing of all involved personnel following a major accident. I work for Anheuser-Busch and it has adopted the same policy. We should expand our current laws to require all vehicle operators in accidents involving personal injury to be tested. Detractors will cite prohibitive costs but drug testing kits are currently available and moderately priced. The program could easily be self-supporting if all positive tests were paid for by the guilty party and they incurred a mandatory fine of double the normal testing fee. A positive test would mean automatic loss of license with a negative test (paid for by the licensee) required for re-instatement. Cost should not be an issue
My idea will definitely work but many people refuse to face the consequences of their actions so implementation is doubtful. Until this idea becomes policy (if ever) I will pretend it is the law. Any accident where I am injured; I will request the other operator be tested for chemical impairment. People with something to hide will obviously resist and demand their privacy. My right to know the truth should take precedence.
It is estimated that more than 75% of all accidents involve impaired vehicle operators. Removing these people from our roadways will greatly improve safety. Bicycles are the most vulnerable of vehicles so we should do whatever possible to get impaired operators off the road.
This is my idea; if you agree mention it to your friends. If you have a better answer; tell me. Maybe we can reach a consensus on what should be done about this growing problem.
Bill Fisk- Safety and Education
Safety and Education Coordinator
Archive Safety Articles
Which Foot Down?
Preparing For Rain
Stopping in the Roadway
Encountering Animals
Why I Commute by Bike
Your Bike and Knee
You Can be Too Far Right
Wrong Way Cyclists
Choosing the Right Tire
Don't Scare the Slow Guy
Using Your Front Brake
How Safe is Bicycling?
How Safe is Your Helmet?
Making Left Turns
Where on the Road Do You Belong?
Rumble strips on the Shoulder
Safer Without Helmet?