Road warning signs likely to increase accidents, deaths
Editor's Musings
Genevieve White
Issue date: 4/3/02 Section: Perspectives
- Page 1 of 1
Driving along Interstate 94 last week, I was suddenly shocked by the words "injure/kill a worker" printed as a heading on a little white sign along the side of the road.
These signs are an unnecessary scare tactic intended to make people more cautious, but that are perhaps more effective at diverting a driver's attention from their primary duty on the road: safe and attentive driving.
"Injure/kill a worker, $7500+ 15 years" is the full denotation of the sign posted on both east and west I-94. The obvious function of these signs is to alert drivers to the danger of driving recklessly near a construction zone, and that it is quite possible to injure someone by not being careful enough.
The intention of this sign's placement is a reasonable one, and can be considered quite an effective method of alerting drivers to danger. They would be quite effective, that is, if they were placed anywhere near a construction zone in which workers were susceptible to being injured.
The two signs I encountered were miles and miles and miles before the construction zone at Conner Avenue, and not preceded by any construction in the immediate area. This completely eliminates its applicability and makes it only effective as a distraction.
Then when the penalty for such a crime is taken into consideration, these signs seem even more threatening. 15 years in jail for the accidental injuring of a construction worker? Certainly a human's life is valuable, but is the roadside slaying of a construction worker such a prevalent occurrence that the penalty needs to be so strict?
While ignoring these outlandish signs is a great enough task, the government feels the need to also flash bright electronic signs stating things like "your tires wear belts, you should too" or "nail a driver and get screwed."
While I'm sure someone makes a great living thinking these clever sayings up, I think these signs are a major distraction that do nothing but making concentrating on one's driving more difficult.
When the cost of these somewhat new and flashy signs is taken into consideration, it seems even more unnecessary to have them scrolling at us every few miles.
Wouldn't our money be better spent patching the jarring potholes and crumbling bridges that plague the metro Detroit area? My driving experience would be much more enriched if my teeth weren't crashing together at every bump and my hubcaps weren't rolling off to the side of the road at every turn.
I'm much more appreciative of a well-maintained and safe road than an offensively green sign eternally stating "approximate time to metro airport: 15 minutes."
The signs put into place on Interstate 94, as well as other major roads in the metro Detroit area are meant to help the average driver and open their eyes to safety issues, but are in themselves a safety hazard that divert driver attention and cost much more money than they're worth.
These signs are an unnecessary scare tactic intended to make people more cautious, but that are perhaps more effective at diverting a driver's attention from their primary duty on the road: safe and attentive driving.
"Injure/kill a worker, $7500+ 15 years" is the full denotation of the sign posted on both east and west I-94. The obvious function of these signs is to alert drivers to the danger of driving recklessly near a construction zone, and that it is quite possible to injure someone by not being careful enough.
The intention of this sign's placement is a reasonable one, and can be considered quite an effective method of alerting drivers to danger. They would be quite effective, that is, if they were placed anywhere near a construction zone in which workers were susceptible to being injured.
The two signs I encountered were miles and miles and miles before the construction zone at Conner Avenue, and not preceded by any construction in the immediate area. This completely eliminates its applicability and makes it only effective as a distraction.
Then when the penalty for such a crime is taken into consideration, these signs seem even more threatening. 15 years in jail for the accidental injuring of a construction worker? Certainly a human's life is valuable, but is the roadside slaying of a construction worker such a prevalent occurrence that the penalty needs to be so strict?
While ignoring these outlandish signs is a great enough task, the government feels the need to also flash bright electronic signs stating things like "your tires wear belts, you should too" or "nail a driver and get screwed."
While I'm sure someone makes a great living thinking these clever sayings up, I think these signs are a major distraction that do nothing but making concentrating on one's driving more difficult.
When the cost of these somewhat new and flashy signs is taken into consideration, it seems even more unnecessary to have them scrolling at us every few miles.
Wouldn't our money be better spent patching the jarring potholes and crumbling bridges that plague the metro Detroit area? My driving experience would be much more enriched if my teeth weren't crashing together at every bump and my hubcaps weren't rolling off to the side of the road at every turn.
I'm much more appreciative of a well-maintained and safe road than an offensively green sign eternally stating "approximate time to metro airport: 15 minutes."
The signs put into place on Interstate 94, as well as other major roads in the metro Detroit area are meant to help the average driver and open their eyes to safety issues, but are in themselves a safety hazard that divert driver attention and cost much more money than they're worth.