My Ferndale Insurance Agency is right on Woodward in Ferndale. Therefore, I get to see a lot of cars and drivers. I have seen my share of knee drives, drive-and-read people and we are all hearing about the legislation to ban texting in the car (why that should even need to be a law is crazy…it seems obvious doesn’t it?).

As an Insurance Agent I am all for safety. However, this article in the October 7, 2009 Detroit Free Press even caught me off guard. I didn’t even know this was a law.

So fans of fuzzy dice, graduation tassels and pine tree air fresheners rejoice. It looks like you can have your rear view mirror back.

Marty O’Neill, Insurance Agent

State may lift ban on hanging objects from rearview mirrors

BY MATT HELMS
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER

Michigan drivers may soon be able to hang air fresheners and other unobtrusive items from their rearview mirrors without fear of getting a ticket.

The Senate Transportation Committee passed a bill Tuesday that would end the state’s ban on dangling anything from rearview mirrors. The proposal would leave wiggle room in the law, allowing police to cite drivers with obvious obstructions, but permitting items such as rosaries if they don’t block a driver’s view.

The bill’s sponsor said the state’s blanket ban leads to selective enforcement.

“If you go down the road, about every fourth car has something hanging from its mirror,” Sen. Ron Jelinek, R-Three Oaks, said Tuesday. “Why would you pick one car to stop and let 100 go by?”

The State Police opposes ditching the ban outright.

“If you remove the ban completely, essentially anything goes,” said trooper Chris Hawkins, legislative liaison for the State Police. “You could hang an 8×10 photo from your rearview mirror, and we would have no mechanism for enforcing that.”

The proposal doesn’t spell out the specific size or type of items that wouldn’t be permitted. So it’s not clear whether things such as handicap-parking placards — which advise users to remove before driving — would be considered an obstruction.

That decision would be up to police, said Gabe Basso, legislative aide for Sen. Jud Gilbert, R-Algonac, the transportation committee chairman.

Basso said the bill’s prospects in the Legislature are good. Gov. Jennifer Granholm’s office said she supports the measure.

Jason Dobrovalski, 34, of Melvindale who has a peach air freshener hanging from his mirror, said the state shouldn’t ban innocuous items.

“You see people with big GPS deals on their windshields,” said Dobrovalski, a warehouse worker for U.S. District Court in Detroit. “That’s more of a difference than a little air freshener.”

I will be interviewed on a radio show, The Business Reality Network, this Sunday (July 13th) at 10:15 am. The show is on WDFN, 1130 AM and can also be heard via the web at www.businessrealitynetwork.com.

I will be discussing insurance along with opening and running a small business. You are invited to listen in.

Marty O’Neill, Insurance Agent

As frequent readers know, I am very dedicated to promoting auto safety and keeping auto insurance rates low. Today I have posted an article from the National Institute for Highway Safety. It is about teen drivers and their phones. I hope you find it helpful–Marty O’Neill, Insurance Agent.

Arlington, VA — Teenage drivers’ cellphone use edged higher in North Carolina after the state enacted a cellphone ban for young drivers, a new Institute study finds. This is the case even though young drivers and their parents said they strongly support the restrictions. Parents and teens alike believe the ban on hand-held and hands-free phone use isn’t being enforced. Researchers concluded that North Carolina’s law isn’t reducing teen drivers’ cellphone use.

The two-part study coupled researchers’ observations of teenage drivers with telephone surveys of teens and their parents in the first evaluation of a cellphone law for young drivers. North Carolina’s ban for drivers younger than age 18 is part of the state’s graduated licensing system.

Just 1-2 months prior to the ban’s Dec. 1, 2006, start, 11 percent of teen drivers were observed using cellphones as theyleft school in the afternoon. About 5 months after the ban took effect, almost 12 percent of teen drivers were observed using phones. Most drivers were using hand-helds. Nine percent were holding phones to their ears, while fewer than 1 percent were using hands-free devices. About 2 percent were observed dialing or texting. Cellphone use remained steady at about 13 percent at comparison sites in South Carolina, where teen driver cellphone use isn’t restricted.

“Most young drivers comply with graduated licensing restrictions such as limits on nighttime driving and passengers, even when enforcement is low,” says Anne McCartt, Institute senior vice president for research and an author of the study. “The hope in North Carolina was that the same would hold true for cellphone use, but this wasn’t the case. Teen drivers’ cellphone use actually increased a little. Parents play a big role in compliance with graduated licensing rules. Limiting phone use may be tougher for them since many want their teens to carry phones.”

Parents and teens support cellphone ban: When surveyed after the cellphone restrictions took effect, teenage drivers were more likely than parents to say they knew about the ban. Only 39 percent of parents said they were aware of the cellphone law, compared with 64 percent of teen drivers. Support for the ban was greater among parents (95 percent) than teens (74 percent). Eighty-eight percent of parents said that they restrict their teenage drivers’ cellphone use, though only 66 percent of teenagers reported such parental limits. About half of the teenagers surveyed after the law took effect admitted they had used their phones, if they had driven, on the day prior to the interview.

Restrictions are rarely enforced: Most parents and teen drivers agreed that police officers weren’t looking for cellphone violators. Seventy-one percent of teens and 60 percent of parents reported that enforcement was rare or nonexistent. Only 22 percent of teenagers and 13 percent of parents surveyed believed the law was being enforced fairly often or a lot.

“Cellphone bans for teen drivers are difficult to enforce,” McCartt notes. “Drivers with phones to their ears aren’t hard to spot, but it’s nearly impossible for police officers to see hands-free devices or correctly guess how old drivers are.” Absent some better way to enforce them, “cellphone bans for teenage drivers aren’t effective, based on what we saw in North Carolina,” McCartt adds.

In both North Carolina and South Carolina, observed cellphone use was significantly higher among girls than among boys and higher when teens drove alone in vehicles rather than with friends. For example, 13 percent of female drivers and 9 percent of males were observed using cellphones in North Carolina before the law. Cellphone use was 14 percent among solo drivers and 8 percent among teens with 1 passenger. More SUV drivers than car drivers were viewed using phones.

Phone bans for young drivers are becoming commonplace as concerns mount about the contribution of distractions to teens’ elevated crash risk. Seventeen states and the District of Columbia restrict both hand-held and hands-free phone use by young drivers. Six states and DC bar all drivers from using hand-helds. For a state-by-state list of cellphone laws, visit www.iihs.org.

I like to post everything I find about child auto safety. Today the Detroit Free Press reported on Michigan’s child booster seat laws.–Marty O’Neill, Insurance Agent

BY CHRIS CHRISTOFF • FREE PRESS LANSING BUREAU CHIEF • March 26, 2008
LANSING — The big buckle of the law will get bigger to protect more kids on Michigan roads.

Gov. Jennifer Granholm is expected to sign a bill soon requiring car booster seats for children ages 4 through 7 who are less than 4 feet 9.

Current state law requires a car seat of some kind for children younger than 4.

“It’s more protection, something we should have done a long time ago,” said Sen. Michelle McManus, R-Lake Leelanau and sponsor of the bill.

McManus said a car booster seat costs between $10 and $25 but said the state can apply for a federal grant to give booster seats free or at a reduced cost to families that qualify based on their incomes.

The new law, effective July 1, would allow police to stop drivers for a booster seat violation alone, as a primary traffic offense. Fines would be $65.

Advocates of the bill say vehicle seat belts don’t properly fit across the smaller bodies of children, leaving them vulnerable to accident injuries from the belts themselves.

Booster seats raise children higher so seat belts fit snugly across their chests and hips, instead of their necks.

The strap-in seats reduced neck, spine and abdominal injuries for children ages 4-7 by 59%, according to a 2003 study by the American Medical Association.

Michigan would become the 39th state to require booster seats for children through age 7.

“I think it’s a fabulous idea. I think there should be a five- point harness required for kids up to 8,” said Christina Calderwood, 36, of Rochester.

She said her 5-year-old uses a safety seat rather than a booster seat, and he doesn’t complain.

“He knows race car drivers wear five-point harnesses,” Calderwood said.

Tara Bradshaw, 39, of Wyandotte said some parents will view the new law as a government intrusion. But Bradshaw said she uses a booster seat for her 4-year-old.

“When it’s a law, more people do it,” she said. “I don’t like the government telling me what to do, but I’m all for doing what’s necessary to keep my children safe.”

The issue was a topic Tuesday on the Free Press’ MotorCityMoms.com Web site, where most readers supported the new booster seat requirement.

Still, some questioned whether it would be a hardship to some families or merely was an attempt to muster revenue for police departments through more fines.

A 2006 national survey found that 58% of children ages 4-7 were restrained in booster or safety seats.

The state is planning a public awareness campaign for the new booster seat law through the Office of Highway Safety Planning.

I like to make sure you are getting the latest information on auto safety and that includes auto thefts. Hazel Park is seeing a rash of thefts, mostly on running cars. Below you will find a Daily Tribune article from March 12, 2008–Marty O’Neill, Insurance Agent

By John Michalak
Daily Tribune Staff Writer
HAZEL PARK — Three vehicles were stolen in Hazel Park Monday and all the owners could be charged in connection with the thefts.

The owners left their vehicles running and unoccupied with keys in them. That’s a misdemeanor violation of a local ordinance, said Hazel Park Police Chief David Niedermeier, who again on Tuesday reminded residents about the law.

Niedermeier last year forewarned residents that police would charge persons when they saw cars running without anybody attending to them. The warning came when the city had a rash of vehicles stolen after residents warmed the vehicles.

“You can’t leave cars running and unattended,” Niedermeier said. “Obviously that’s what happened in these cases. It is a common ploy by car thieves to look for exhaust smoke.”

Instead of residents helping thieves, Niedermeier said they should take measures to reduce crime opportunity.

“The majority of property crime — and some violent crime — can be stopped simply by hardening the target,” Niedermeier said. “Don’t make yourself and your property easy targets. You don’t leave your valuables in plain view, your cars running or your bikes on the front lawn. And that’s the case regardless of what community you live in. Citizens can go a long ways in reducing crime rates by using common sense.”

In the most recent car thefts, one of the victims got her vehicle back after she saw it unoccupied at a gas pump at a Sunoco station on Eight Mile Road in Detroit.

The victim, Nicole L. Meier, 25, had reported her 2000 Pontiac Grand Am stolen shortly before 8 a.m. on West Milton.

Nearly two hours later she and her boyfriend spotted the vehicle at the gas station and called Hazel Park police. An officer stood by the vehicle as Meier went home to get another set of car keys. A clerk at the gas station told police he didn’t see the driver of the stolen vehicle.

“I don’t think I’ll ever do that again,” said Meier, adding she didn’t know warming her vehicle unattended is against the law. “I learned my lesson. It won’t happen again.”

Meier said she had a hunch her Pontiac Grand Am wouldn’t go far because the gas light came on the night before the theft.

“It didn’t have any gas so my boyfriend and I went around looking for it,” Meier said. “It ended up being at a gas pump at the Sunoco station five blocks away from my house. The car was in drive, but there was no damage to it.”

Since the thief kept her keys, Meier said she purchased a Club wheel lock for her car and changed the locks to her house.

Other vehicles stolen Monday were a 2001 Pontiac Grand Am on the 1000 block of East Pearl and a 1999 Pontiac Montana from the 300 block of East Milton.

A question I face a lot is with regard to child safety seats. The problems usually come in the form of confusion. Please don’t know how to get the seat placed correctly in the car, don’t know what size seat to use and don’t know if the seat they are using is of good quality. The government is stepping in and in the article listed below from the AP you can see that the safety ratings are getting easier to understand.

Marty O’Neill, Insurance Agent

By KEN THOMAS
ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON — Parents who struggle to install their child safety seats or fasten their toddlers in the backseat chairs are getting new guidance from the government.

The Transportation Department said Wednesday it was revamping a consumer ratings system for child safety seats to help parents and caregivers make the best choice.

The new approach is to use a five-star rating system, based on the seats’ ability to secure a child and the ease with which the seats are installed. It also is to consider the seats’ labeling and instructions.

“We believe that the new star system will help simplify one of parents’ most important decisions: choosing the best safety seat that will protect their children,” Transportation Secretary Mary Peters said at an Arlington, Va., fire station.

Many parents can attest to the frustration found in securing a car seat or making sure their child is strapped in. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said seven in 10 child safety seats are either the wrong size or misused, reducing their ability to protect kids in a crash.

NHTSA estimates that child restraint systems reduce fatal injuries by 71% for infants and 54% for toddlers in cars and by nearly 60% for infants and toddlers in SUVs, pickups and vans.

By Marty O’Neill, Insurance Agent

When people get ready to walk across a public road, they usually look both ways first to see if any motor vehicles are coming. Unfortunately, this isn’t the case with animals, including certain large ones. Too often, the result is a motorist’s nightmare: a collision with a deer, moose or elk. The animal usually comes out second-best in this type of close encounter, but the toll on vehicles and their occupants can also be substantial.

Each year, more than 150 people die in animal-vehicle collisions, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety says. The Insurance Information Institute estimates some 1.5 million such collisions cause about over $1 billion in damage annually. While animal-vehicle collisions can happen any time of year, fall is the peak season for deer-car crashes. That’s mainly because autumn is both mating season and hunting season, so deer are more active and more likely to roam beyond their normal territory.

No foolproof way has been found to keep deer, moose and elk off highways and away from vehicles. Deer whistles have their advocates, but the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety says there’s no scientific evidence to support claims they work as intended. Some studies suggest roadside reflectors – designed to reflect light from vehicle headlamps and cause deer to “freeze” rather than cross the road – reduce crash frequency to some extent.

There are ways you can lessen an unplanned meeting with a deer, moose or elk. Here’s how:

• Be aware of your surroundings. Pay attention to “deer crossing” signs. Look well down the road and far off to each side. At night, use your high beams if possible to illuminate the road’s edges. Be especially watchful in areas near woods and water. If you see one deer, there may be several others nearby.
• Be particularly alert at dusk and dawn, when these animals venture out to feed.
• If you see a deer, moose or elk on or near the roadway and think you have time to avoid hitting it, reduce your speed, tap your brakes to warn other drivers and sound your horn. Deer tend to fixate on headlights, so flashing them may cause the animal to move. If there’s no vehicle close behind you, brake hard.
• If a collision seems inevitable, don’t swerve to avoid the animal; your risk of injury may be greater if you do. Hit it, but control the vehicle. Report the crash to the police.
• Always obey the speed limit and wear safety belts.

Being alert at all times while driving is your best defense against any type of accident.