Traffic Safety

I protest and take strong exception to the style, content and conclusions of The Times’ Valley Edition editorial titled “Self-Policing Is Best Traffic Ticket,” Sept. 29.

This editorial is the most egregious example of garbage journalism I’ve read in a long time, and I read a lot. The unnamed author of this jewel is repeatedly guilty of making statements where unsubstantiated conclusions are put forth as the correct interpretation of inadequate data. From this supposedly informative editorial, look at some examples:

* “Local motorists actually want traffic cops to issue more tickets.” What motorists want is for other drivers to drive with more courtesy and safety. Not more tickets!

* “Radar gun is key weapon in battle against speeders.” In truth, the radar gun is a key weapon for raising government revenue.

* “The overwhelming evidence is that enhanced enforcement saves lives.” No evidence to back up this statement is present in the editorial. What, therefore, is meant by “enhanced enforcement”? More tickets? To my knowledge, issuing more traffic tickets has not been demonstrated to result in saving lives by any scientific group independent of the police. This statement is conjecture at best and certainly unworthy of being stated as though it were a proven fact. Let me offer for your consideration my hypothesis: What might result in saving lives and reducing accidents is more and greater visibility of police officers, not more tickets.

* “So far this year, serious and fatal collisions in the Valley are down 22% from last year, dropping from 426 to 326.” Again no evidence is offered that there exists any connection between more tickets and lower accident rates.

* “Traffic rules are easy to obey.” Two sentences after this one, the editorial states: “For every ticket we get, we probably avoid 10 or 20 others.” It could be postulated that traffic rules are, in fact, not so easy to obey 100% of the time.

DENNIS McCOY

Tujunga