As a driver, let me go through some of these one at a time:

1) Speeding really isn't a problem. IMHO the penalties are high enough, and raising them further doesn't really fix anything.

2) The driving tests have nothing at all to do with driving skill. Having to take the test more regularly won't improve how people drive.

4) More incentives for carpooling aren't going to help, because there's no way to give people enough incentive to make it worth their time. Even here in california, where the roads are terrible, I still don't bother to carpool - it's just not worth the effort.

5) This one is an infrastructure issue. I don't know that law enforcement would ever be able to do that effectively.

6) Heck yeah, self driving cars are the way to go. Self driving cars basically fix all the problems, all at once.

7) I don't think a non-qualified license is the correct way to handle self driving cars. I'm pretty sure that set of problems will be solved a different way.

8) This is another area I don't think is necessary, but that's more because I think liability will be handled differently when we have these kinds of vehicles. I wouldn't worry about this just yet.

9) Again, driving test reform is likely to do nothing but waste people's time. It's not going to magically make people into better drivers.

10) Anti-cell phone laws already exist. The problem isn't that it's illegal, the problem is that there's no way to catch enough people doing it for it to matter. Again, a problem that goes away with self driving cars.

Based on this, if you have the ability to change something or sell people on an idea, I'd try to push self driving cars the hardest. If you get that, almost all your other solutions aren't needed. Plus, self driving cars would be awesome.

Most of these are good ideas. But I suspect that it won't happen because most people drive, most people don't want these rules. Thus, drivers would support any politician who ran on a platform that keeps these rules from happening. Not to say they're not worthwhile, just the reality of democracy.

What I'd love to see is a post car ownership society. Anyone needs a car they summon one and it takes them where they want to go.

This is really interesting, and you have some good points. It's something I've thought about as well. Since you raise a lot of points I'm going to respond in the order of the points you made.

 

> 1: harsher penalties for speeding. This one is self explanatory, mostly, but it comes from the fact that I hear so much about how people have to speed to keep in line with other traffic, or they don't feel safe. This is stupid, IMO, and if people can't follow the rules, they shouldn't be allowed to drive the most dangerous machinery that everyone has access to.

 

So at least in my area this would not go down well. Tickets in general have been under significant scrutiny in a lot of areas. The accusation is that local governments are establishing quotas to maintain fines as a revenue stream. Whether the allegations are true are up for debate but the concern is real and very controversial. Although an emphasis on following the rules of the road should be there I don't know if increasing fines is necessarily viable because of the controversy of raising those prices. While it makes sense that when people are operating vehicles they should be cognizant of the rules, that just doesn't happen (as we all know too well). I doubt many people would get behind this in a vote, and it would have the potential to harm the political careers of representatives. However if speeding were cut there would undoubtedly be an increase in safety, not just for the blind and visually impaired but for the community as a whole.

 

> 2: Everyone retakes the test every 2 years. I know the DMV is a place where souls go to die, but if people had to go through all the tests every two years, the number of poor drivers should decrease because they're getting up-to-date training every two years.

 

I discussed the idea of public resistance in the last point, but I'll touch on it here again. People would not like this, vote for it, or support politicians who ran on this as part of their platform. However, I think this one is more possible, and would probably have a more meaningful impact on preventing dangerous driving. A few years ago I had a summer job where the only people working in the warehouse (except for forklift drivers) were legally blind. There was a woman who was legally blind who drove to work every day because her license hadn't expired yet. She almost hit me twice, as well as a fellow coworker and this drove me insane. This person of course thought it was hilarious that she had almost killed/ seriously injured me. I totally get independence but when someone is unable to operate a vehicle to the point of harming someone else it is time to hang up the license. In short, I totally get you on this and agree that this needs to be a thing.

 

> Mandatory statewide day-to-day transit services for people with disabilities. I can get to a doctor appointment just fine though my medicaid, but the grocery store, bank, and a job are more difficult to get to, and that's dumb.

 

This is another nice thought, but in areas that are struggling with funding it may be difficult to make it happen. I've kind of just accepted public transit as my only means for independent commuting which is fine by me, I kind of like getting outside and walking. However this admittedly takes longer than getting a ride but I usually just try to plan ahead. Some people don't like this and I totally get it, but individual transit for people who can't drive due to a disability would be enormously expensive and most places will probably stick to offering discounted Call-A-Ride services.

 

> 4. More incentives for carpooling/mass transit. A special lane that people abuse anyway isn't enough, especially since that lane isn't available everywhere.

 

Couldn't agree more :) The amount of cars on the roads, particularly in the US is entirely too high and the country would benefit greatly from a more efficient and refined public transit system in it's major urban centers. I like to use London, New York, and Chicago as examples of places that do it right. I think refining public transit systems incentives their use in and of themselves.

 

> 5. Civilians should be able to use their phones to record a speeding or unsafe driver and give that information to law enforcement efficiently. I can't tell you how many times I've almost been hit by people not observing white cane laws, and I want those people to understand how unfair it is that I have almost no recourse.

 

At least in the US I don't think there is anything illegal about this. When in public people shouldn't have any reasonable expectation of privacy and lots of times cell phone recordings are used as evidence in all kinds of cases.

 

> 6: self-driving vehicles should be incentivized. Companies should get more grants from the Dept of Transit, owners should get tax breaks/credits.

 

This is definitely the way to go. Self driving cars are definitely the way of the future and they kind of solve every other problem on the road today with regards to poor driving habits. However the technology is still not all the way flushed out and it is very expensive. Google and more recently Tesla have been having a lot of success with it, and other companies are hard at work. There are a lot of political hoops to jump through before it becomes a thing though. We just have to play the waiting game, but I am really excited about the progression of this technology.

 

> 7: More on autonomous vehicles: We need a new class of driver's license; Non-qualified operator license. This license would be given to someone who owns an autonomous vehicle, but can't operate a non-autonomous one for some reason, either because they have a disability or chose not to. If there's an accident, non-qualified operators can't be at fault unless they actively screwed up somehow.

 

I don't know how viable this is. One of the biggest controversies over autonomous cars is who will be at fault in the event of a fatality. If a license is offered to those with disabilities that prevent the safe operation of a vehicle that gives the immunity from responsibility over their vehicle, everyone will want one regardless of disability. This I think will be the hardest part of getting autonomous vehicles on the road regularly and it still needs to be worked on in the legal system.

 

> 8: Disabled owners of autonomous vehicles should have their auto-insurance be part of their medicaid.

 

I don't think any politician would give the go ahead on this. It also seems like it is assigning an unfair privilege that tax payers have to pick up to insure a convenience item. Everyone else has to pay their own insurance, it's part of owning a vehicle.

 

> 9: in general, more strict driving tests, and getting a traffic ticket should mean automatic retraining that the driver has to pay for. Dept of Transit can use increase in funding to help pay for aforementioned medicaid-auto insurance and other stuff.

 

I can get on board with more strict and frequent driving tests, too many people are incompetent drivers that don't deserve a license. Driving is a privilege, not a right. However I can't get behind increased fines, it just seems far too harsh. In addition fining people more to pay to subsidize free insurance for disabled drivers probably wouldn't go down so well. I also take issue with the idea of an immediate requirement of payment and suspending the license until it is paid (if I read that correctly). Many people rely on their vehicle to get to work to pay for that ticket, removing that ability makes things harder and is kind of counterproductive. In addition, not all tickets make sense, I have family members who have had to fight stop light camera tickets because it was taking pictures of plates even though they weren't running them. The same goes for questionable speeding tickets. Everyone should have the ability to contest those charges in court without being punished in the meantime for an infraction that they possibly didn't commit.

 

> 10: using a cell phone while driving is a primary infraction, and hands-free calling setups of any kind are no exception. Any use of cell phones while traveling more than 10mph results in a ticket.

 

So I have family in California, they really don't care about the no phone rules. I don't think these kinds of laws actually work anywhere. I don't think anyone is going to give up their hands free calling either. The fact is that the distraction is there and it's up to drivers to be responsible about what they are doing but increasing the penalty isn't going to make people stop doing it. Just look at speeding, I have a family member who was caught speeding way over the limit, $600 dollar ticket... he still speeds. If you just revoked licenses then no one would be able to drive, I can't think of a single driver that I know who hasn't been pulled over for speeding and/ or ticketed. Tickets just make everyone angry and they don't really prevent speeding practically.

 

I think you raise some good points, it's just some things aren't all that viable. I for sure think that autonomous cars need to be integrated into the traffic system as soon as possible. Anyway, thanks for sharing :) I love discussions about this kind of stuff and hearing other people's input on how we can improve. It's good to think about.

 

Edit: Formatting