We have all experienced—and at times been baffled by—the persistent gridlock that clogs our roadways. Often, it is not merely high traffic volume to blame, but avoidable obstructions caused by minor accidents and inattentive or inconsiderate driving behavior. For law enforcement and emergency personnel responding to critical incidents, these delays are more than frustrating; they are dangerous. Each day, preventable slowdowns from fender benders in passing lanes or drivers refusing to move to the right trigger ripple effects that delay emergency response, endanger lives, and expose both officers and the public to serious risk of injury or death.
According to the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund (NLEOMF), from 2010 to 2019, 43% of all line-of-duty deaths among officers were caused by motor vehicle crashes or “struck-by-vehicle” incidents. In 2024 alone, traffic-related fatalities among officers rose by a staggering 48%. These sobering statistics highlight the urgent and ongoing threat that traffic environments pose to law enforcement personnel, a danger often exacerbated by inadvertent public actions, such as lane blocking, failure to follow safety protocols, or failure to clear accidents from travel lanes.
While county and state legislators must take more decisive action to improve roadway safety for both the public and first responders, law enforcement agencies already possess powerful tools to mitigate these risks.
One such tool is rooted in the work of B.F. Skinner, whose theory of operant conditioning teaches that behavior can be shaped by its consequences. Through positive reinforcement (rewarding desired behavior), negative reinforcement (removing unpleasant conditions), and punishment (introducing consequences to reduce undesired behavior), officers can directly influence the conduct of motorists. (Skinner, 1978)
By adopting a behavioral approach to traffic enforcement, officers can go beyond routine summons. They can foster a culture of compliance and safety on New York’s roads, highways, and parkways. The strategic issuance of summonses should be viewed not only as a legal measure but also as a behavioral interventional way to correct and prevent dangerous patterns of behavior on the road in the future.
Through targeted enforcement, the application of existing traffic laws, and behavior-based policing grounded in proven psychological principles, law enforcement can help address policy gaps and encourage safer driving habits in real-time. Holding motorists accountable for negligent or obstructive behaviors, such as failing to move operable vehicles after minor crashes or lingering in passing lanes, sends a clear message: unsafe conduct on our roads will not be tolerated.
Such proactive measures not only reduce congestion and prevent secondary accidents, but they also protect lives, including those of the officers dedicated to protecting us.
This policy framework proposes integrating Skinner’s operant conditioning principles into traffic enforcement to reduce roadway hazards following minor accidents or instances of failing to move to the right in the passing lanes.
Specifically, it supports the use of summonses under “no standing/parking on highway” statutes and “move-it” or “slowpoke” laws to shape the behavior of safer drivers. By applying positive punishment, such as issuing a summons when a driver fails to move their vehicle, law enforcement adds an unpleasant consequence, decreasing the likelihood of that behavior recurring.
The visible presence of officers or signage warning of enforcement serves as a discriminative stimulus, signaling to drivers that compliance is expected or that consequences will follow. Through shaping, drivers gradually learn to adjust their actions, such as failing to move to the right (moving out of the left passing lane) or clearing the travel lane quickly after minor accidents, as they associate their behavior with predictable outcomes.
In contrast, extinction occurs when unsafe behaviors, such as failing to move to the right or obstructing traffic after a minor crash, are ignored or tolerated. Without enforcement, the behavior is inadvertently reinforced and allowed to continue.
This framework emphasizes repeated and consistent enforcement results in behavior modification: “If I don’t move my car, I’ll get ticketed,” reinforcing the norm that failing to move a vehicle will lead to a summons. Furthermore, Social Learning occurs when drivers see others receiving summons or learn about others receiving summons for the same offense; they adjust their behavior without direct punishment. The same learning behavior occurred with seat-belt enforcement, known as “click-it or ticket-it.” This approach not only promotes public safety but also fosters long-term cultural change in roadway safety.
Many states have recognized the dangers of obstructed roadways and have implemented “Move-It” or “Steer It, Clear It” laws to maintain traffic flow and protect emergency responders. For example, California’s Vehicle Code § 20002(a) requires drivers in minor, non-injury accidents to move their vehicles out of traffic lanes if drivable and safe. Likewise, Florida law (Fla. Stat. § 316.027) mandates that drivers remove operable vehicles from the roadway after a crash; failure to comply results in a traffic summons. These laws prioritize the safety of first responders and help reduce secondary collisions and traffic congestion. By incorporating these principles with behavioral enforcement strategies, New York law enforcement can more effectively tackle daily gridlock caused by minor accidents and lane-blocking behaviors.
New York does not have a clear law that requires drivers to move their vehicles off travel lanes after minor accidents, unlike states such as California and Florida, which do. However, law enforcement officers can still promote safer driving habits by using existing regulations. When officers respond to minor collisions, they often encounter drivers who fail to move their vehicles to a safe location.
This behavior poses risks to the drivers, officers, and other motorists. Officers have the authority to issue a traffic infraction (summons) under Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1201(a) for stopping or standing on the main part of the highway when it is possible to pull over to a safer location. Additionally, VTL § 1120(b) requires slower vehicles to stay in the right lane, and drivers vacate the left lane when they are impeding traffic. Nonetheless, officers can issue a traffic infraction (summons) for this conduct. When officers enforce these laws consistently and fairly, such traffic infractions(summons) can lead to measurable changes in behavior.
This policy proposal aims to address the legislative gap in New York by reframing existing laws, such as VTL § 1201(a) and § 1120(b), through the lens of operant conditioning, focusing on proactive behavior change rather than mere punishment.
By utilizing summonses as a form of positive punishment and reinforcing compliance through stimuli such as officer presence or signage, law enforcement can influence driver behavior in real-time and promote safer road norms.
Until the legislature enacts a specific “move-it” law, this framework provides a practical, enforceable, and psychologically grounded solution for improving public safety. By combining current laws such as VTL § 1201(a) and §1120(b) with targeted, behavior-based enforcement and officer training, New York can lead a cultural shift that reduces secondary crashes, clears roadways more efficiently, and saves lives, including those of the law enforcement community who risk their own to protect us!
References
Skinner, B. F. (1978). Reflections on behaviorism and society. Prentice Hall.
National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund. (2025, January 7). 2024 End-of-Year Preliminary Law Enforcement Officers Fatalities Report. Retrieved from https://nleomf.org/2024-law-enforcement-fatalities-report-reveals-law-enforcement-deaths-incresed/
New York Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1201(a)
New York State Legislature. (n.d.). Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1201: Stopping, standing, or parking outside business or residence districts.https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/VAT/1201
New York Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1120(b)
New York State Legislature. (n.d.). Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1120: Drive on right side of roadway; exceptions. https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/VAT/1120
Florida Statutes § 316.027 & §316.061
Florida Legislature. (n.d.). Florida Statutes Chapter 316: State uniform traffic control.https://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/
California Vehicle Code § 20002(a)
California Legislative Information. (n.d.). California Vehicle Code § 20002: Duty where property is damaged. https://law.justia.com/codes/california/2021/code-veh/division-10/chapter-1/section-20002/
Journal of Road Safety. (n.d.). Move over laws and incident response personnel safety in the USA. Journal of Road Safety. https://journalofroadsafety.org/article/122580-move-over-laws-and-incident-response-personnel-safety-in-the-usa
U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. (2008). Move It Laws.https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop08057/20.htm#:~:text=The%20intent%20of%20%E2%80%9CMove%20It,4
