| Summary: | 碩士 === 靜宜大學 === 法律學系 === 107 === Scooters have become the major transportation in an urban traffic for a long time. Amount all the other motorize vehicles, scooters have the most casualties in the current traffic accidents. Researches have indicated that riding a scooter, different from driving a car, has a higher possiblity to occur accidents with other vehicles. As the result, the government implemented a policy to restrict the driving space of scooters to enhance the safety of driving.
The sign of the scooter forbidden is the main measure as a vehicle diversion of straight line, and the two-step left turn is for intersections. The government believes the vehicle diversion could reduce traffic accidents, and restricting the driving space of scooters is an effective method to achieve the goal of vehicle divesion. Although the criterions and the effectiveness of the driving space restriction of scooters are currently lacking. Local governments tend to play safe and chose the most easy way to limit the driving space of scooters without conducting a thorough evaluation. Furthermore, after Taoyuan City government ran a pilot scheme of canceling the sign- scooter forbidden, they discovered there was forty percent of traffic accidents reduced. As the result, the appropriateness of restricting the driving space of scooters has been questioned more.
This paper is trying to use the aspects of the history and social development, as cut-in points, to explain why restricting the driving space of scooters was used to pursue the safety of driving. It is not only based on the physical characteristics of scooters, but also on the bias people have to scooters and scooter drivers, seeing them as a transitional product and would be washed out through the development process in Taiwan. However, the number of scooters grows largely than predicted, and it has never been as a transitional vehicle.
By using the proportionality principle to exam the scooter forbidden measure, this paper finds there is no clear evidence to prove that restricting the driving space of scooters could reduce traffic accidents.There is no good rationle or guidline for where and how to set a sign of scooter forbidden. And for the purpose of vehicle diversion and safety, the scooter forbidden measure is not the method with the minimum damage, comparing to a priority lane for scooters. On the other hand, a two-step left turn measure can be separated from the scooter forbidden measure and create a vehicle diversion when scooter drivers need turn left from an outside lane.This paper, after analysing the outcomes of canceling the scooter forbidden sign in some cities, suggests that the central government needs a more careful research for setting the guidlineof scooter forbidden measure, and each local goverment bears the responsibility to decide where and how to apply the measure within urban area.A safer traffic environment.can only be reached through a more delicated policy.
|
|---|
