Traffic Enforcement as it reflects the national political divide

" L.A. Drivers are killing pedestrians--they need to be stopped."  This is so much more effective than "Slow down L.A. drivers!"  which is sort of wimpy and doesn't promise to clearly demarcate good from evil.  No matter how subtle or convincing the article, first it has to be read, which requires a headline that stirs some passion.

Both are actual headlines for the exact same article in the L.A.Times, but the one depicting drivers as murderers was on the open internet competing for the revenue of increased readership,while the other was for subscribers of the newspaper, many of whom would resent being vilified for their driving habits.   In the broad scheme of things, advertising revenue is less important than influencing the yawning political divide of our country, now moving perilously close to disastrous consequences.

One aspect of this growing national schism is in policing, including traffic law enforced by uniformed officers, whether under the auspices of a mayor or elected sheriff.  Enforcement is backed by lethal weapons that can be used if an individual driver resists the orders of such authorities, justified by such laws being determined by the democratic process.  The effect of penalties for traffic infractions vary widely; for those in the lowest socio-economic strata, possibly resulting in life changing consequences, a fine that means eviction or inability to maintain employment.  While for those of wealth, the consequences of the very same infraction are trivial.

The article in my introduction defined a method of decreasing traffic fatalities that is in sharp contrast to a regulation just passed unanimously by the Encinitas city council.  That regulation will allow the proliferation of speed bumps, that within wide statistical parameters of existing traffic and speed, will be determined exclusively by the residents in homes abutting the streets.  During the recent  half hour discussion at the council four speakers from a single street presented their case, without any discussion of the adverse consequences of such a crude method of random degradation of a roadbed.  It's as if the billions spent on creating paved roads that allow the driver to concentrate on a safe comfortable drive are to be reversed by the jarring bumps, given the ironic name, "cushions."

Venues from city hall to the Senate Chambers constitute the web of democracy that our nation is predicated upon. The nature of national politics is that power is decided by the mass media, either a rare charismatic personage such as he who was elected to the presidency, or those with vast wealth who can dominate the media.  Such content has little similarity to the Federalist papers that argued the merits of our constitution that still guide this ship of state, which were actually read carefully and debated by the citizenry of that era.

What a gift it is that we still have the venues of local government, where we know personally those who legislate, which makes it more of a travesty when this institution falters.  The failure is not in the nature of a decision, but when the formulation is based on soundbite rather than substance.  Traffic rules are now the most frequent nexus between law and citizen, where the process that requires deference to law enforcement agents should be designed with the greatest care, not by accepting the stereotype of the malicious automobile driver. 

Traffic stops have become a major front in the cultural-political schism that is now consuming our country.  Our President in his campaign encouraged police use of force, with the vague spector of enlisting such sworn officers as extensions of his personal militia.  To perpetuate irrational rules as defined as such by rigorous research, means that what becomes law is arbitrary, and inconsistent with the actual driving practice of experienced careful drivers.

Accepting such laws that are only rarely enforced is giving arbitrary authority to those who are sworn to serve and protect.  This provides such officers with the legal right to detain any one of those of the vast majority of careful drivers based on their own discretion,  a temptation for abuse that should never be allowed.  The recent regulation passed for proliferation of speed bumps, has no evidence of increased safety, as the drivers attention is diverted to avoiding or mitigating the shock to the vehicle and passengers.

If ever this was the moment to have an open and extensive discussion it was for this issue.  The simplification of group vilification has no place in local government, especially where the goal of minimizing harm to pedestrians is something that is universally held.