Determining the Relationship of Primary Seat Belt Laws to Minority Ticketing [Traffic Tech]
-
2011-09-01
Details:
-
Corporate Creators:
-
Subject/TRT Terms:
-
Publication/ Report Number:
-
Series:
-
Resource Type:
-
Geographical Coverage:
-
Corporate Publisher:
-
Abstract:When a State converts from secondary to primary seat belt enforcement, studies show increases of 10 percentage points or more in observed seat belt use. Primary enforcement laws allow an officer to ticket a motorist whenever they observe a seat belt offender. Under secondary enforcement, an officer must stop the vehicle for some other infraction first. While approval ratings of primary laws are high, issues of minority harassment, differential enforcement, racial profiling, or “driving while Black” still arise in discussions when States convert seat belt laws to primary enforcement status. A number of studies suggest that minorities perceive stricter law enforcement than Caucasians overall and were more likely to believe that they would be ticketed if unbelted. These studies showed no systematic differential enforcement in actual ticketing. Differential enforcement is clearly undesirable. One element that makes seat belt laws effective is the heightened perception that they are being strictly enforced. Primary laws motivate people to obey laws and convey the message that a State considers seat belts important to the safety of its citizens. NHTSA conducted a study to investigate changes before and after States switched to primary enforcement. Thirteen States upgraded seat belt laws to primary enforcement between 2000 and 2009.
-
Format:
-
Collection(s):
-
Main Document Checksum:
-
Download URL:
-
File Type:
Supporting Files
-
No Additional Files
More +