Unless pedestrian-on-motorist incidents are undergoing some kind of growth spurt, the "unsafe morotrist" section on that flier should be at least twice as large as the "unsafe pedestrian" section. But it's good to see that MPD is stepping up. Hopefully, they'll do it in the rest of the city as well.

by aaa on Aug 12, 2010 3:45 pm • link • report

Safety may be a 2 way street but the majority of the responsibility is on drivers, there's no way around that. They must understand that they are driving a multi ton machine and must pay attention to their surroundings every minute they are driving.

by james on Aug 12, 2010 4:07 pm • link • report

What about blocking the intersection? I see this everyday where a car tries to beat the light but winds up in the middle of the intersection. Now pedestrians have car(s) blocking the crosswalk and pedestrians have to start playing Frogger. This is dangerous for the walker, and it has to be annoying for the cars that can't get through the intersection. How can we stop this behavior?

by Tom on Aug 12, 2010 5:34 pm • link • report

@Tom, it's a big problem downtown too (I'm thinking especially of K St. around McPherson and Franklin squares). MPD could make a ton of ticket revenue (I'm presuming this is illegal).

by Dan Miller on Aug 12, 2010 5:46 pm • link • report

@Tom What about blocking the intersection? I see this everyday where a car tries to beat the light but winds up in the middle of the intersection.

While there may be times that a car is trying to 'beat the light', my experience is that when traffic is particularly heavy, it's almost impossible to know ahead of time if the street on the other side of the intersection will be clear by the time you get there ... And if you decide to wait for it to be clear before proceding, then almost invariably a motorist from an adjoining lane will view the "open space" as an opportunity to inch forward a bit ... and effectively keep you waiting at a red light. Part of this problem could be solved by giving pedestrians a separate 'walk' cycle since a big part of the delay in moving forward is the fact that the walk signal coincides with the green signal ... and even 1 car turning right will easily eat up most of the green cycle for the cars behind them wanting to go straight. I guess the downside for pedestrians would be having to wait longer periods for their a 'green'.

by Lance on Aug 12, 2010 7:48 pm • link • report

I actually heard a MPDC police officer state that they don't like to ticket drivers because then they get complaints. Seems like there are plenty of complaints about non-enforcement that they're not hearing about. David, does someone responsible at MPDC read this? Is someone at DDOT a better option?

by Lisa on Aug 13, 2010 10:22 am • link • report

"I actually heard a MPDC police officer state that they don't like to ticket drivers because then they get complaints."

I've never gotten a complain because of a traffic ticket, but then again I may be lucky. Most officers, as far as I know, don't like to ticket because they don't like to go to traffic court. Unless you apply to have set days for traffic court, you get summoned at random times, and unless you're writing reams of tickets a month you usually only have one or two tickets that are being contested. The problem with that is that unlike regular court, where you get a minimum of two hours or pay guaranteed to cover the fact that you're coming in off duty and possibly for only a short amount of time, traffic court only pays you for the time you're there.

Let me illustrate: So say you live in Manassas or Bowie and you have a 9am hearing and you normally work the 3 to 11 shift. You drive in, fight traffic, have to find parking down by 300 Indiana Avenue, N.W.. You then have to check in an wait for the hearing. Most of the time you do the hearing and by the time you're out it's an hour to an hour and a half later. Now you're in D.C. and it's 10:30 and you've been paid an hour and a quarter of pay, but you've burned $10 for parking, and you have to be back at work by 3:00. Do you go fight traffic to go home, relax for an hour then drive back again? Do you find someplace to hang out and waste your offtime?

When you look at it like this, you can see why officers don't like to write tickets and do traffic unless it leads to arrests. If MPD got the Bureau of Traffic Adjudication to regularize pay with court pay (i.e. a two hour minimum for appearing) and schedule multiple ticket hearings for officers on one day, you might see an uptick in traffic enforcement.

by Boomhauer on Aug 13, 2010 10:38 am • link • report

Surely you don't want to get in a big discussion about the hoops that some people go through to do the realities of their jobs and lives. I'm surprised you didn't mention child care needs or having ice cream melting in the back seat. Sorry, but the job is called 'law enforcement.' When simple, universally understood laws like "red light means stop" are not enforced in the city, we all suffer. Move into the District.

by Lisa on Aug 13, 2010 10:49 am • link • report

@Boomhauer - That's interesting. Thanks for the insight.

Others - I saw a whole bunch of MPD officers giving out tickets the other night to people making illegal turns at 7th and H. Good for them. I know that the city will never enforce the bus-bike lane restrictions on 7th and 9th, but it's nice to see folks getting tickets for making illegal turns.

It's not fair that the people who follow the law have to wait in congested car lanes and can only make turns at designated corners when law-breakers zoom by them (usually) without penalty.

by todd on Aug 13, 2010 10:59 am • link • report

Pedestrian safety is an issue that requires a more in depth approach, which is yet to occur. In an effort to improve the relationship between a pedestrian and a motor vehicle driver, DDOT, MPD, DC Council Members, and Traffic Safety Advocates really need to observe the relationship dynamics involved and construct a realistic solution to this ever-growing problem.

by cheryle on Aug 13, 2010 2:00 pm • link • report

Lisa,
What on earth are you thinking? Here (apparently Officer) Boomhauer takes the time to explain how his pay structure is actually structured to dis-incentive his writing traffic tickets, and your comment to him is essentially "quit whining?" The guy's job is law enforcement, sure, but he's not on duty all the time. Or are you saying we should all be doing our jobs at least 125% before even thinking about being compensated for our time? Jeez.
My reaction to Boomhauer's post was, hey how about that. There are actual personal financial disincentives to officers' enforcing traffic laws? This blog covers and debates the financial incentives that affect public space and public safety all the time. I hope some other smarter more experienced reader might have something intelligent to say about this aspect of the situation.

by pinkshirt on Aug 13, 2010 5:08 pm • link • report

@Boomhauer Thanks for your insight, the disincentive there is pretty shocking. Clearly you don't want to have a major incentive for officers to give citations, lest you end up with over-regulation, but you certainly don't want disincentives either.

by Erik W on Aug 13, 2010 5:38 pm • link • report

"Move into the District."

I live in Ward 1, so my explanation applies more to the 75% of unionized officers who live outside of D.C.. I don't mind writing tickets (or papering court cases), but that's because its not an inconvenience to be down at court.

"The guy's job is law enforcement, sure, but he's not on duty all the time."

Well.......sort of. It's a unique challenge to live in the city you work as an officer. I'm technically "on duty" and have a duty to take "police action" (in the general sense) as soon as I set foot in D.C., which is 95% of my time.

"There are actual personal financial disincentives to officers' enforcing traffic laws?"

Yep.

"Clearly you don't want to have a major incentive for officers to give citations, lest you end up with over-regulation, but you certainly don't want disincentives either."

Being a D.C. officer, there's never going to be a huge incentive to write tickets. We're never getting a cut, and D.C. doesn't need us for revenue generation.

And moreover, you're never really going to be able to craft an economic solution that satisfies everyone. Look at my example above and now replace the 3 to 11pm shift to the midnight shift and change the hearing time to 11 am (or 3pm). Now you have an even larger disincentive for the average officer to do substantial traffic enforcement in a manner that changes driver behavior. Toss in the fact that officers may have court, training, and other professional obligations on their time that they have no control over and you can see how officers will make the rational decision to exercise their discretion and not write fines with their NOIs. The same rationale also applies in other areas of law enforcement for MPD, juveniles being one example. But that's a discussion for another day.

by Boomhauer on Aug 14, 2010 1:17 am • link • report