FAQs

What’s so bad about these traffic stops?​

Traffic stops for non-safety related reasons, such as a broken taillight or expired tabs, increase the risk of physical, psychological, and economic harm, especially in Black communities. Studies and data have shown drivers of color are stopped at higher rates than white drivers, putting them at risk for needless harm. These stops also have a negative impact on low-income drivers who are then burdened with fines and fees they are unable to afford, making it harder to maintain their vehicles, which gave rise to the stop in the first place. These stops therefore keep certain drivers in poverty without improving public safety.

​

​Is Traffic Safety for All a decriminalization bill? 

This bill doesn’t decriminalize anything — and maintenance issues like expired tabs or broken taillights aren’t crimes. Officers can still ticket and fine drivers for minor infractions, but those infractions would not be the primary or sole reason for being pulled over. Police would instead prioritize stopping people for high-risk behaviors like drunk and distracted driving, and other reckless driving behaviors that are an immediate threat to road safety.

​

Under Traffic Safety for All, what can officers still stop drivers for?

This bill authorizes officers to pull drivers over for all criminal violations, any “moving” violation, and hazardous equipment violations. Moving violations are related to a driver’s behavior while driving, and include behaviors like running a red light or stop sign, speeding, driving under the influence or impaired driving, swerving, following too closely, etc. Under this bill, officers are also authorized to pull people over for equipment violations that pose an immediate safety risk to the driver or others on the road. For example, driving without headlights on at night, a dragging muffler, or a shattered windshield.

​

Would this bill embolden drivers to engage in other reckless behaviors? Would people drive around without doors or windshields?

A car driving without a door or windshield would surely be a dangerous equipment violation, allowing officers to stop cars under the Traffic Safety for All bill. Stops for any equipment violations that create an “immediate, serious threat to the safety of the operator or others on the roadway” are permissible.  Not having critical pieces of equipment on a vehicle puts at least the driver in immediate safety risk, and under the bill, officers will continue to pull them over.

 

Aren’t non-safety related traffic stops pivotal for catching criminals and uncovering other crimes? Serial killers like Ted Bundy have been caught in a traffic stop, and these minor traffic stops result in the police catching lots of impaired drivers. Won’t this make it harder for police to keep the road safe?

No. These type of non-safety related stops rarely lead to the discovery of additional crimes or even the discovery of contraband (firearms, drugs, etc). Ted Bundy was stopped for reckless driving, and even so, there are several examples of criminals being stopped for a non-safety related reason and being released. Ultimately, data — both locally and nationally (in places like Tennessee, Massachusetts, and California) — show these stops are an ineffective method for fighting crime.

​

Washington State Patrol, for example, stopped more than 11 million motorists between 2009 and 2019, and found contraband in only 0.27% of those stops. In 99.7% of those State Patrol traffic stops, no contraband was found whatsoever. The facts show these stops are not effective crime fighting methods.

​

​

Even if low-level traffic stops recover only a small number of guns or drugs, isn’t that worth it to keep our community safe?

The small number of guns or drugs recovered does not justify the time and resources spent on performing these type of traffic stops. When less than 1% of 11 million traffic stops lead to the discovery of a crime, those are resources that can be reprioritized for actual road dangers, rather than slowing down law-abiding drivers in our communities.

​

Some police say that low-level traffic stops are their best opportunities to have a safe, civil encounter with community members and are thus necessary for police to establish good community rapport. Do we really want to take that opportunity away from them?

Unfortunately, that isn’t the lived experience of many people who are stopped. Studies have shown these stops lead to unnecessary harm and social costs, especially for Black drivers and other drivers of color who are stopped, searched, and experience the potential for violence during these stops at higher rates than white drivers. These social costs include negative effects on individual and community health, educational achievement, economic well-being, civic participation, and community engagement. Prioritizing traffic stops for immediate dangers on the road will reduce the number of interactions that could potentially cause harm and ensure everyone gets home safe, including law enforcement.​