Re: Following traffic rules: What action will encourage / induce / force people to do it? SST Sir, thank you for starting this thread. My apologies for a long post.
Decades ago, like many people even today, I learned driving from an older brother. He's a very good driver, but not a very good teacher. On my bike, I had a few minor accidents in a row. My father grounded me for 6 months. That was painful. In those days, driving schools were practically worthless; mostly run by touts whose main function was to somehow get the licence for the student (you know what I mean). What was I to do?
There was a gem of a book at home, the Reader's Digest AA Book of the Car. The first half of it was devoted to car tech, and the other half to safe, defensive driving. I had always been interested in the first half. Now I focused on the second half. After months of studying the same material, I became a much safer driver - no more accidents.
A decade later I went to California. It was here that I really understood good driving. The Dept. of Motor Vehicles has a student handbook available for free. If one wishes to obtain a driving licence there, one better know this book really well. It describes the MV Act in layman's language and its practical application with illustrations. It opens with this classic line: "A driver's licence is a privilege, not a right".
In over two decades of driving there, I was in two accidents, both deemed to be the fault of the other driver.
Leaving aside driving skills and attitude in India, which you have ably highlighted in several posts (and which, unfortunately, I totally concur with) what additionally differentiates India and the US is the road and traffic engineering that happens there. If I violate the MV law there, it would be totally, completely my fault.
I haven't driven in North India, Kerala, and the former AP, so I can only speak about Chennai and Bangalore.
US: The law is very clear and precise and covers every scenario
Here: I believe there is a certain amount of vagueness in the law. I confess I haven't read through the legalese, but my understanding is that it is not as rigorous and specific as in the US
US: Stop lines are always there and never faded
Here: 50% of the time not there, or faded away
US: Multiple signal lights are provided for each direction (one for each lane); there is no way you can miss them
Here: One signal at the extreme left, placed 40 feet high amidst branches. You stop because others are stopped in front of you, not because you can see it
US: Signal goes from green to amber and stays on amber for x seconds; x determined by the speed limit on that road. You have enough time to sail through the intersection before the light turns red or stop safely before the stop line, depending on your speed (at or below the limit of course) and your distance to the signal when it goes from green to amber. If you jump a red, it's 100% your fault. Rarely, the timing is off, and if you contest it, a traffic engineer will come out with a stop watch to time it, and if found faulty, it will be fixed and your ticket will be annulled. Accidents are infrequent because a vehicle in the intersection has right of way even on red and even if other directions have green. Even when one has a green, one cannot enter the intersection unless it is clear.
Here: Green turns to red in 1 or 2 seconds. When I enter the intersection, I do so on a green. Suddenly, I am breaking a red. This has happened to me multiple times, and I was caught in Chennai a few times - "we have photo proof - pay up".
US: Pedestrian crossings are provided at reasonable intervals; prominently marked
Here: Bangalore civic authorities are twiddling their thumbs though pedestrians are killed every week at busy intersections because of the absence of police and skywalks. Traffic just sails through.
US: Dedicated turn lanes are provided in all newer areas (very old areas don't have them). Since the turn lane is spawned from the innermost lane, you continue in your lane if going straight and get into the turn lane only if turning.
Here: Your innermost straight lane suddenly becomes a turn lane at an intersection. To avoid getting stuck, you have to swerve from the center lane to the left and then swing back after the intersection.
US: When there are two turn lanes, it is the law that u-turns have to be made from the innermost turn lane. Nobody is suicidal enough to do that from the outer turn lane!
Here: All u-turns are made from the leftmost lane. Once in Chennai I turned on my signal 10 seconds early then made a u-turn at a place without a signal (divider ended). A two-wheeler coming behind at very high speed (~ 60 - 70 km on a small city-road with mother riding pillion) crashed into my right rear door. Fortunately nobody was hurt. Though we all went our separate ways, I was blamed for making a u-turn from the innermost lane. "Who does that - you are mad. You should have moved to the extreme left and then started your turn. Others would have known what you were going to do". I could see the logic, but didn't agree with it. In the land of the insane, being mad is normal, and the normal person is mad.
The point I am making here is that the proposed MV Act is well and good, but it is putting the cart before the horse. Let them sort out their infra problems a sample of which I listed above. Unless that is formalized and implemented India wide, with road & traffic engineers and cops being knowledgeable and efficient in their jobs, penalizing drivers would be insufficient. Once the infra is set, it will become that much harder for drivers to argue that the signal light didn't work or the stop line wasn't there.
At the same time, let them make the licence testing process rigorous so that only truly qualified people are on the roads. This should include a retesting process for currently licenced drivers as well.
Merely imposing stiff fines on badly trained drivers and making ignorant government staff enforce these will not magically reduce deaths and make India safer.
Thanks for reading. |