Why do our traffic laws prioritize speed over safety?

When Vision Zero—the strategy to eliminate all traffic fatalities and severe injuries while increasing safe, healthy, equitable mobility for all—first emerged in Sweden in 1997, U.S. cities were quick to jump on board … and with good reason. Each year, more than 42,000 people are needlessly killed on American streets and thousands more are injured.

While the Vision Zero movement in Europe has been very successful, the U.S. has sadly continued to struggle. According to research by The Johns Hopkins Center for Injury Research and Policy, the U.S. has actually seen a significant increase in traffic fatalities at the same time as countries like Sweden, Spain and the Netherlands have experienced a reduction in fatalities of 50% or more through implementation of Vision Zero strategies. 

Today, the U.S. ranks worst in road safety among 29 high-income countries recently analyzed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. And despite efforts on the part of numerous U.S. cities to implement Vision Zero measures, from lowered speed limits and curb extensions to protected bike and pedestrian lanes, the U.S. saw traffic fatalities in 2021 rise to the highest level in 16 years. The number of people killed while simply walking exceeded 7,600, an astounding 77% increase in pedestrian deaths since 2010.

Why is Vision Zero failing in the U.S., and what needs to happen to slow the devastating toll traffic accidents are taking?

While some Vision Zero advocates have demanded more funding, greater government oversight and an increase in dedicated staff focused exclusively on Vision Zero improvements, the real challenge in the U.S. can be found in the national culture. For many, the freedom and speed that driving provides is an essential element of the American spirit. As Leah Shahum, Founder of the Vision Zero Network, recently noted, “Every single city is up against a century of decisions and policies and designs that have really prioritized the fast movement of cars above the safe movement of people.” As a society, we are entrenched in speed!

Until recently, in fact, the primary metric for calculating highway speed limits in the U.S. was the 85th percentile rule, a traffic engineering standard that sets speed limits based on analysis of the speed at or below which 85% of vehicles travel under free-flowing conditions. This has led to traffic policies that focus on maximizing speed and minimizing delay. Unfortunately, such policies have also contributed to unsafe highway conditions in which traffic deaths and severe injuries are regarded as a sad but inevitable side effect of modern life.

The reality is that such tragedies can be prevented by taking a proactive, preventative approach that prioritizes traffic safety as a public health issue. But guess what? Elected officials are listening to the speeders, the commuters wanting to get from Point A to Point B as fast as possible. Those drivers are convincing elected officials that speed and red-light cameras are nothing more than a money grab and need to be taken down. There is nothing further from the truth. The speed camera is the carrot that encourages drivers to stay within the limit, while the fine is the stick. 

To change that, a major shift in thinking needs to occur, starting with a recognition that traffic engineering decisions and policies must be based on the reality of physics as opposed to the perception of time. That translates into a need to recognize the frailty of the human body and start thinking about redesigning our transportation system with respect to our physical vulnerabilities. Even moderate changes in speeds can have major safety implications. Data indicates that three-quarters of the people hit by a vehicle traveling 50 miles per hour will die, but if that speed is reduced to 32 mph, the number of fatalities will drop to 25%. Decrease the speed to 23 mph and the number of deaths will plummet to 10%.

This is not rocket science. Lower speeds mean fewer crashes and less severe injuries when crashes do occur.

The physics of lower speeds leading to fewer deaths will only become our reality, however, if we muster the political will to enact policies that slow drivers, require vehicle safety features and provide worthy walking, biking and transit options. State and local officials must start thinking about redesigning transportation systems with the physical vulnerabilities of the human body in mind. This means taking the necessary steps to encourage a fundamentally safer culture for drivers, cyclists and pedestrians by lowering speed limits and installing protected bike and bus lanes, curb extensions, crosswalks and more frequent traffic signals. 

Unfortunately, enacting these Vision Zero measures inevitably will be met in at least some areas with pushback from the electorate. And let’s face facts: that part of the electorate that drives cars is a much larger percentage than those taking transit, riding bicycles or using electric scooters. 

Community leaders and elected officials must figure out what is most important. When we as a community install bike lanes and reduce road widths, we will be reducing the likelihood of traffic accidents and the resulting fatalities or serious injuries if an accident does occur. These measures will reduce traffic speeds, but drivers (who are also constituents and voters) do not want to be slowed down traveling to and from school, work or any other destination.

 So what will it be, America? Will we opt for speed and a lack of congestion—along with the inevitable carnage that will produce? Or do we have the political will to lower speeds, improve public safety and ultimately save lives?

Think about this, then think about the thousands of families who lose spouses, siblings and children to traffic accidents. Let's get cracking and make Vision Zero a reality.

Wes Guckert is president and CEO of The Traffic Group, a Maryland-based traffic engineering and transportation planning firm and Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business.