The Vera Institute of Justice recently published a new polling deck—Winning the Narrative on Safer Roads and More Equitable Traffic Stops: Findings From National Polling and Public Opinion Research—that contains extensive framing advice for talking about how to shift police capacity towards the traffic stops that most impact public safety (for example, drunk driving).
Here are three key findings:
- Framing a redistribution of traffic stops away from police officers as “removing the burden on police” triples support—net +39 versus net +13—compared to framing the policy shift as a “ban” on police traffic stops.
- Only minor differences emerge when comparing different labels for the categories of stops that police would no longer make. However, “non-safety related stops” inched above other labels such as “minor”, “administrative” or “technical violations.”
- “The Safe Traffic Stops Act” is the name for potential legislation on the topic that best resonates with voters.
As Safer Cities previously reported, voters strongly support rethinking road safety and the role of police traffic stops. For example, polling from Safer Cities previously found:
- “Nearly 3-in-4 voters support banning traffic stops for minor offenses that pose no imminent safety risk like broken tail lights and outdated registration”; and
- “69% of voters—including sizable majorities of both Republicans and Democrats—support state laws that would reclassify minor traffic violations so that they no longer warrant a traffic stop.”
Vera’s research examined how best to title such legislation in order to effectively communicate its intent to voters. “The Safe Traffic Stops Act” emerged as the far-and-away most compelling “potential name for legislation that aims to make roads safer by reducing pedestrian and car crashes.”
And, finally, here is Vera’s three-step framework for talking about shifting police capacity towards the traffic stops that most impact public safety:
