Traffic School Rules Vary in California

T. W. McGarry’s characterization of traffic school (Around the Valley, June 15) is quite accurate, or at least concordant with my observations.

However, he neglects to mention the lack of statewide uniformity with respect to the frequency with which one may attend traffic school in order to “hide one traffic ticket from the insurance companies.” Apparently the frequency with which one may legally attend traffic school varies by jurisdiction even though motor vehicle laws do not. Of course, insurance rates vary by geographical area. For instance, apparently in Beverly Hills one may attend traffic school once every six months whereas in Los Angeles one may only attend traffic school annually.

This leads to questions concerning the basis for such lack of uniformity of traffic school attendance frequency. Does Beverly Hills dispense twice as many traffic citations as Los Angeles? Do those in Beverly Hills have poorer memories or driving habits necessitating greater frequency of “education” in traffic school? Are insurance rates so much higher and raised so much higher per traffic citation in Beverly Hills than in Los Angeles necessitating for financial equity a greater frequency of traffic schooling? If traffic school is punishment, then people in Los Angeles are either punished less than people in Beverly Hills or perhaps are thought to be unable to tolerate a high frequency, every six months, of punishment. Are there yet other reasons for this lack of uniformity of potential for frequency of traffic school attendance?

SYLVAIN FRIBOURG

Woodland Hills