INFLICTION OF SERIOUS INJURY OR DEATH TO VULNERABLE ROAD USERS

Section 1: As used herein, the term “vulnerable road user” includes:

(a) a pedestrian, including those persons actually engaged in work upon a highway, or in work upon utility facilities along a highway, or engaged in the provision of emergency services within the right-of-way; or
(b) a person riding or leading an animal; or
(c) a person lawfully operating or riding any of the following on a public right-of-way, crosswalk, or shoulder of the highway:

1. A bicycle, tricycle, or other pedal-powered vehicles;
2. A farm tractor or similar vehicle designed primarily for farm use;
3. A skateboard;
4. Roller skates;
5. In-line skates;
6. A scooter;
7. A moped;
8. A motorcycle;
9. An animal-drawn wheeled vehicle, or farm equipment, or sled;
10. An electric personal assistive mobility device; or
11. A wheelchair.

Section 2:

A person who operates a motor vehicle in a careless or distracted manner or [commits an existing violation under state law] and causes serious physical injury or death to a vulnerable road user shall be guilty of infliction of serious physical injury or death to a vulnerable road user.

Section 3:

A person issued a citation under this section shall be required to attend a hearing before a court of appropriate jurisdiction.

Section 4:

A person found to have committed an offense under this statute shall be required to either:

(a)  have his or her driving privileged suspended for a period of no less than 6 months; and one or more of the following:
(1) pay a monetary penalty of not more than two thousand dollars; and/or
(2) serve a period of incarceration which may not exceed thirty days; and/or
(3) participate in a motor vehicle crash prevention course; and/or
(4) perform community service for a number of hours to be determined by the court, which may not exceed two hundred hours.

(b)  

[Receive a penalty equivalent to or greater than the state’s vehicular or negligent homicide statute].

The model vulnerable road user law is primarily based upon Oregon’s law. It is meant to increase awareness about the need to for drivers to be attentive when sharing the road with non-drivers and provide a level of punishment that fills a gap between normal traffic citations and criminal vehicular homicide, manslaughter, or driving while intoxicated laws.

Section 1 defines who is included as a “vulnerable road user.” The model law attempts to be as inclusive as possible with the defining characteristic of people included in the definition being the lack of automotive-style occupant protection, such as crash zones, windshields, and seatbelts.

Section 2 defines when the law is applicable and who can be charged with a violation of the law. This is a section of the law that likely needs tailoring to each individual state. The core concept of this section is that a driver who does some unsafe behavior and causes the serious injury or death of a vulnerable road user can be punished according to this law. We believe this type of punishment is justified because:

• Unsafe behavior is worthy of punishment,
• Serious injury or death are appropriate aggravating circumstances for enhanced punishments,
• While no serious injury or death is acceptable, it makes sense to provide a greater punishment when the injured or killed party is more vulnerable in order to promote a societal norm that people capable of causing more harm bear a greater responsibility due to that capability.

Section 3 requires a person charged according to this law to attend a hearing. This section is meant to provide an opportunity for victims of road violence and their families to be involved in the legal process. Every state has a victim’s rights law, but non-criminal traffic offenses usually do not afford victims of road violence those rights. This section does not provide victims of road violence the same rights as victims of crimes, but ensures that there is more to the justice process than the payment of a fine.

Section 4 provides the punishments that are to be given to a person convicted of a violation of this law. This is a section of the law that likely needs tailoring to each individual state. Section 4(a) provides one mandatory punishment and requires one additional punishment. A driver’s license suspension is the mandatory punishment because driving is a privilege, not a right, and it is appropriate to lose that privilege due to unsafe behavior. The other potential punishments: a monetary fine, incarceration, education, and community service provide options to tailor a punishment to the particular offender.

Each state has different existing laws and different political climates. Effectively using our model law requires knowing both.

The model law only contains text for traffic rules. In creating legislation, you should feel free to draw upon the explanation of the law, talking points for similar laws, and other relevant sources to create a legislative declaration or preamble that explains the importance of the law to your state, legislators, and governor.

The model law assumes that all relevant words used in the model law have been defined in your state’s laws. If your state has not defined relevant words, e.g. “bicycle” or “lane,” then your legislation should address the definition of those words. The words used in the model law may have particular meanings in your state, for instance “roadway” can have a particular meaning in some states that is inclusive or exclusive of a shoulder. In creating legislation, you should feel free to use the words already defined in your state that best adapt the model law to your state’s existing definition. However, there may be times where this review of definitions provides an important opportunity to clarify these ancillary terms.

The model law is based upon current laws. You should feel free to propose new language that extends protection to bicyclists and other vulnerable road users. You should work with law enforcement officials and prosecutors to understand the best way to provide legal protections to vulnerable road users. In particular, it is very important to understand currently available penalties and current traffic offenses in order to make the VRU law a valuable option for law enforcement and prosecutors. Please draw upon the resources provided by the League to find what every state does to protect bicyclists and create the best possible where to ride law for your state.

The model law is likely to have a fiscal impact on your state because it provides incarceration as a potential punishment. There are many political realities that you may discover when proposing a law based upon the model law. You should feel free to adjust the model law to the political realities of your state and the coalition of advocates you have created for the law. 

• A Vulnerable Road User Law provides general deterrence for bad behaviors around vulnerable users.
• A Vulnerable Road User Law can fill legal gaps between less and more severe offenses, providing additional charging options to local prosecutors.
• A Vulnerable Road User Law recognizes and provides a tool for crashes that result in serious injury or death, which have severe societal costs.
• All traffic violations are serious and a VRU law is one tool to use, but penalties should be strengthened for many violations – a VRU law may not be the best tool for all states given their current laws and statutory punishments.
• A Vulnerable Road User law promotes public awareness of the threat posed by motor vehicles and the vulnerability of people outside of motor vehicles.

• The League of American Bicyclists’ review of state vulnerable road user laws, including citations to state laws that provide enhanced penalties without defining a group of “vulnerable road users”: http://bikeleague.org/content/bike-law-university 
• An explanation of the origin of Oregon’s vulnerable road user law by Ray Thomas, a member of the Bicycle Transportation Alliance’s legislative committee and the League’s Legal Affairs Committee, and chief proponent of the concept: https://www.tcnf.legal/vulnerable-user/
• An examination of the vulnerable road user law concept by New Zealand researchers investigating whether it is appropriate for New Zealand: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/242015406_Is_it_time_to_advocate_for_a_vulnerable_road_user_protection_law_in_New_Zealand
• A report on the first use of Washington State’s vulnerable road user law: http://www.bikingbis.com/2014/02/13/driver-fined-for-violating-washingtons-vulnerable-user-law/

How many states have VRU laws?

12 states have laws that define a vulnerable user or vulnerable road user and provide particular penalties for actions towards those vulnerable road users or when violations of traffic law lead to the serious injury or death of a vulnerable road user  – Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington.

What is the average punishment under a VRU law?

Punishments range dramatically between states. Most laws are written so that a fine of up a specified amount can be given under a VRU law. The lowest maximum fine is $550 while the highest maximum fine is $12,500. Most states have set their maximum fine above $1000. Washington state requires a minimum fine of $1000.

Why should the serious injury or death of some people be punished more than the serious injury or death of others?

It is a tragedy that people are seriously injured or killed regardless of how they were moving around. Every effort should be made to make our roadways safer for everyone. However, punishing people who do unsafe behavior that affects vulnerable road users furthers a societal good where the powerful are conscious and respectful of their own power and the threat they pose to people not similar situated. People driving cars have a tremendous potential to hurt or kill others, particularly people outside of their cars, and this law provides a mechanism for drivers to internalize the threat they pose to others.

How often are drivers prosecuted when they seriously injure or kill a bicyclist?

The short answer is nobody knows because governments, at the federal, state, and local level tend not to collect data on prosecutions related to road violence. In 2014, the League published a report that looked at media reports related to 628 bicyclist fatalities that occurred in 2012 and found reports that drivers were punished in only 12% of reported fatalities. You can find out more in the Every Bicyclist Counts report. Your local or state court system may have prosecution and citation data.

A 2013 report by the Center for Investigative Reporting found that in 238 pedestrian fatalities 60% of motorists found to be at fault or suspected of a crime faced no criminal charges.