Hubbry Logo
Brake checkBrake checkMain
Open search
Brake check
Community hub
Brake check
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Brake check
Brake check
Brake check
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Rear-end collision is a possible outcome from brake checking.

A brake check, also known as a brake test, occurs when a driver deliberately either taps on the brakes several times or slams hard on the pedal when moving in front of another vehicle, with the intention of causing the behind driver to either collide or take evasive action.[1] The term is often applied in the context of auto racing.[1]

Legality

[edit]

United States

[edit]

In most states, brake checking is considered a crime and falls under laws pertaining to reckless driving, aggressive driving, or stunt driving.[2][3] Under Section 22109 of the California Vehicle Code, a driver cannot stop suddenly or decrease their speed on a highway without giving an appropriate signal to the drivers behind them.[4] The Washington State Department of Licensing in the United States includes brake checking as a symptom of aggressive driving.[5]

Canada

[edit]

Legal experts in the Canadian Province of Ontario consider it to fall under that province's stunt driving laws.[6][7]

In motorsports

[edit]

The concept of brake checking is often seen in auto racing, with several drivers being accused of, or admitting to, brake checking competitors for various reasons. At the 2006 Lenox Industrial Tools 300 at New Hampshire Motor Speedway, NASCAR driver Robby Gordon brake checked Michael Waltrip during a caution period in what was seen as retaliation for contact both made earlier in the race and for an incident that occurred between the two the year prior at the same track. The stoppage caved in the nose and radiator of Waltrip's car, leaving him stranded in the middle of the backstretch with fluid leaking onto the track.[8]

An incident in the 2017 Azerbaijan Grand Prix between Lewis Hamilton and Sebastian Vettel was attributed to Vettel's belief that he had been brake checked by Hamilton.[9]

In 2018, an on-track incident between NASCAR drivers Kevin Harvick and Denny Hamlin at the spring Martinsville Speedway race ended in what Autoweek's Matt Weaver described as, "Harvick ... slamming on his brakes, the resulting contact severely damaging the nose on Hamlin's Toyota." Hamlin would later comment, "I probably should have brake-checked him in the first place."[10]

In 2021, at the Saudi Arabian Grand Prix, Max Verstappen brake checked Lewis Hamilton after Verstappen was asked to give a place back for previously overtaking Hamilton off track. Red Bull Racing's chief technical officer Adrian Newey said "I think he got frustrated with Lewis not overtaking him but he still shouldn't have brake-tested him."[11]

In the 2024 Australian Grand Prix, during the final lap of the race, Aston Martin's Fernando Alonso brake tested Mercedes' George Russell at Turn Six of the circuit, which caused Russell to close distance unusually fast. This culminated in Russell losing control of the car, causing him to crash, with the car coming to rest upside-down in the middle of the track. This saw the race ending under a virtual safety car. Alonso received a 20 second penalty for erratic driving. Russell would later comment: "It caught me by surprise. I was half a second behind him and next thing he slams on the brakes, accelerates again and then slams on the brakes again."[12]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Brake check

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A brake check, also known as brake checking, is an aggressive and hazardous driving maneuver in which a motorist intentionally slams on their vehicle's brakes abruptly and without justification, usually to provoke or intimidate the driver trailing closely behind them. This practice is commonly associated with road rage incidents, where the initiating driver perceives the follower as tailgating and responds vengefully rather than safely increasing distance or signaling. Brake checks often stem from escalating frustrations on the road, such as perceived aggressive behavior from other drivers, leading the perpetrator to escalate the situation instead of de-escalating it through techniques. While some drivers may view it as a way to "teach a lesson" to tailgaters, it is widely recognized by traffic safety experts as a form of reckless that prioritizes retaliation over . In certain cases, brake checks have been linked to schemes, where the act is staged to induce a collision for financial gain. The dangers of brake checking are significant, as the sudden stop can cause the following vehicle to rear-end the initiator, potentially resulting in whiplash injuries, , or multi-vehicle pileups at high speeds. Legally, brake checking is prohibited in most jurisdictions under laws against reckless or careless , with penalties that may include fines, license suspension, or criminal charges if it leads to an ; for instance, in the United States, it can be prosecuted as a or depending on the severity of outcomes. To mitigate risks when encountering a brake check, defensive drivers are advised to maintain a safe following distance, avoid engaging with aggressive motorists, and report incidents to authorities with footage if available.

Definition and Usage

Definition

A brake check is the deliberate and sudden application of a vehicle's by the leading driver, typically without the presence of an actual hazard, intended to compel the following vehicle to brake abruptly or swerve to avoid a collision. This maneuver is often employed to discourage or to assert dominance , distinguishing it from routine braking performed for reasons such as responding to conditions or obstacles. Variations in brake checking include lighter actions, such as repeatedly tapping the brake pedal to flash the brake lights and signal the trailing driver, versus more aggressive hard slamming of the brakes, which can create a greater risk of rear-end collision. The intent remains provocative, aiming to elicit a reaction from the follower rather than to achieve a necessary stop for hazard avoidance. The term "brake check" evolved from 1940s automotive safety tests conducted by law enforcement to verify brake functionality, with the modern usage as a provocative maneuver against tailgating emerging by the 1970s. It gained prominence as automotive slang in online car forums, first appearing as a noun in 1993 and as a verb in 1994, reflecting its roots in early internet discussions among driving enthusiasts.

Motivations and Contexts

Brake checking is often driven by primary motivations such as retaliation against perceived , escalation of , intimidation of other drivers, or a misguided assertion of by forcing a greater following distance between vehicles. Reactive , exemplified by brake checking, typically arises as an extreme response to behaviors like that the driver interprets as provocative or threatening. These motivations are frequently rooted in broader patterns, where drivers seek to "start a " or assert dominance . Psychologically, brake checking stems from triggered by encounters with , amplifying feelings of threat or loss of control . Individuals with inherent aggressive dispositions, including higher levels of , are more prone to such retaliatory actions, as these traits correlate with escalated responses to perceived road injustices. Cultural influences, particularly among car enthusiasts, can exacerbate this through an "alpha driver" mentality, where drivers view their vehicles as extensions of their , fostering territorial behaviors and heightened to defend their perceived space. In broader contexts, brake checking commonly occurs in high-density environments like urban traffic, merging situations, or parking lots, where close proximity heightens tensions. Over time, what may have originated as an informal enforcement of road etiquette—such as signaling to back off—has evolved into a widely recognized dangerous behavior, contributing to rear-end collisions and prompting safety campaigns by organizations like the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety.

In Road Driving

Aggressive Applications

Brake checks in aggressive contexts on public roads typically involve the deliberate and sudden application of from moderate speeds, such as 40 to 60 mph, without any preceding signs of deceleration to alert the trailing . This maneuver relies primarily on illuminating the brake lights abruptly to force an immediate reaction from the driver behind, often aiming to induce or assert dominance. Perpetrators may also employ repeated, intermittent tapping of the pedal to mimic potential malfunctions, thereby heightening the risk of collision while maintaining . These actions are deeply intertwined with dynamics, frequently occurring as retaliatory responses within escalating cycles of , such as following instances of honking, rude gestures, or perceived . Brake checks contribute to risks, with such incidents comprising approximately 29% of all reported crashes according to (NHTSA) data, particularly prevalent in urban settings where density amplifies confrontations. A 2025 AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety survey indicates that 42% of U.S. drivers admitted to performing a brake check at least once in the prior year, underscoring its commonality in aggressive interactions. Demographic patterns reveal a higher incidence of brake checking among male drivers aged 18 to 34, correlating with elevated rates of aggressive driving behaviors documented in insurance claim analyses. For instance, men account for 78.4% of fatal crashes involving aggressive or careless conduct, with young males in this age group showing markedly higher involvement in road rage-related incidents per telematics and claims data. This trend aligns with broader findings that younger male drivers exhibit greater propensity for retaliatory maneuvers like brake checks, often linked to higher insurance premiums for this cohort due to increased claim frequency.

Common Scenarios

Brake checks frequently occur on highways in response to , where the leading intentionally applies the brakes abruptly to punish a vehicle following too closely, particularly during lane changes or merges that heighten tensions. This behavior is often a retaliatory act stemming from perceived , with drivers tapping or slamming their brakes to signal the need for more space. According to a 2025 study by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, 42% of U.S. drivers reported engaging in brake checking at least once in the past year, primarily as a reaction to being tailgated, which underscores its in high-speed environments where reaction times are limited. In urban intersections, brake checks manifest as sudden stops at lights or yield points, aimed at intimidating drivers behind who may be perceived as impatient or aggressive. For instance, a leading driver might hard upon a yellow light to deter or to express frustration during congested merges into intersections. The AAA Foundation report highlights such aggressive braking at yellow lights as a common risk-inducing tactic in city driving, contributing to the 92% of drivers who admitted to behaviors putting others at risk. Within parking lots or other low-speed areas, brake checks arise during disputes over spaces, where one driver might suddenly halt to block or confront another, often resulting in near-miss collisions in confined spaces. These incidents typically escalate from arguments over spot claiming or maneuvering, with the abrupt stop serving as an immediate show of dominance. News reports document such events. Brake checks are more prevalent in high-density urban traffic areas, such as U.S. cities with congested freeways like , compared to rural roads where lower traffic volumes reduce opportunities for close-following confrontations. The AAA Foundation analysis indicates higher rates of , including brake checking, in urban settings (28% engagement rate) versus rural ones, aligning with reports of frequent incidents on Los Angeles freeways like the 101, where brake checking has triggered escalations during heavy congestion.

In Motorsports

Techniques and Purposes

In competitive motorsports, brake checks are prohibited maneuvers considered dangerous or erratic driving, often resulting in penalties rather than providing a legitimate advantage. While occasionally attempted in aggressive on-track battles to disrupt an opponent's rhythm by forcing sudden adjustments in speed or line, such actions violate regulations like the FIA Sporting Regulations, which classify unnecessary slow or erratic braking as potentially dangerous. Subtle applications, such as light tapping of the brakes, may be claimed to test braking points into corners, but more aggressive slams typically lead to immediate repercussions, including time penalties or drive-throughs. Incidents of this nature occur in series like Formula 1 and , where close-quarters racing can tempt drivers, but they are heavily scrutinized and penalized to prioritize safety. The technique of a brake check requires precise execution at high speeds, often exceeding 100 mph, during overtakes or defensive maneuvers. The leading applies the erratically or abruptly while being closely followed, compelling the pursuer to react swiftly to avoid contact; this demands exceptional control to maintain stability and prevent self-induced spins or penalties. Performed in straightaways or braking zones, it hinges on the driver's ability to modulate pressure—favoring controlled "taps" over hard slams—to achieve disruption while minimizing the risk of a multi-car incident. Such precision is vital in open-wheel or stock car formats, where and close proximity heighten vulnerability. Brake checks in motorsports are addressed under prohibitions against dangerous or erratic driving in contemporary rulesets for Formula 1 and . Today, they fall under regulations like the FIA Sporting Regulations, which classify unnecessary slow or erratic braking as potentially dangerous, imposing penalties like 5- or 10-second time additions, drive-throughs, or Super Licence points leading to race bans. NASCAR similarly addresses reckless behavior with fines, points deductions, or suspensions, reflecting an emphasis on safer, more regulated competition.

Notable Incidents

In the 2006 Lenox Industrial Tools 300 at New Hampshire International Speedway, executed a brake check on during a caution period near the race's conclusion, causing Waltrip's car to spin into the wall and sustain significant damage that forced him to retire to the garage. This act was widely viewed as retaliation for a contentious 2005 incident at the same track where Waltrip had spun Gordon out of contention, leading to a heated post-race confrontation involving Gordon throwing his helmet at Waltrip's car. No formal penalties were issued for the 2006 brake check, but it exemplified the personal rivalries that can escalate in stock car racing. During the in , a high-profile clash occurred between and under the , where Vettel rammed the rear of Hamilton's Mercedes, accusing him of deliberately brake-checking by suddenly slowing down. data reviewed by the FIA stewards cleared Hamilton of any intentional brake-testing, determining that his deceleration was consistent with prior safety car laps and aimed at managing pace. Vettel received a 10-second time penalty and three penalty points on his super license for the collision, which damaged both cars' rear wings but allowed the race to continue; the incident intensified the 2017 drivers' championship battle between the two. A controversial brake check unfolded in the when , leading under the , abruptly braked in front of on lap 37, causing Hamilton to collide with the rear of Verstappen's and sustain a puncture. The stewards deemed the maneuver "erratic and potentially dangerous," issuing Verstappen a 10-second time penalty and two penalty points on his license, which dropped him from first to third in the race classification behind Hamilton, who went on to win. team principal and advisor later acknowledged the error, with Marko issuing a rare apology for initially denying the brake test; the incident fueled ongoing tensions in the tight 2021 title fight. At the 2024 in , brake-tested George Russell on the penultimate lap by suddenly lifting off the throttle and braking at Turn 6, leading Russell to lose control and crash heavily into the wall without contact between the cars. Stewards investigated video, telemetry, and audio evidence, concluding that Alonso's actions constituted "erratic braking" intended to hinder Russell ahead of the DRS detection zone, resulting in a 20-second time penalty that demoted Alonso from sixth to eighth place. Alonso claimed he had a "dirty air moment" affecting his breathing, but the penalty stood, marking a rare sanction for an uncontacted incident and sparking debate on aggressive defensive tactics in Formula 1. During the 2025 at , driver was handed a 10-second time penalty for erratic braking behind the , which cost him the race lead and dropped him in the order. The stewards determined Piastri's sudden deceleration was unnecessary and potentially dangerous during the safety car period, leading to frustration from the driver who bit his tongue in post-race comments. This incident highlighted ongoing enforcement of rules against brake testing under safety car conditions.

In the United States

In the United States, brake checking is primarily addressed through state laws rather than a specific federal statute, as traffic enforcement falls under state jurisdiction. It is commonly classified as , defined as operating a vehicle with willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property. For instance, in , brake checking violates Vehicle Code § 23103(a), which prohibits such disregard on highways or in off-street parking facilities. In Washington, it can constitute reckless driving under RCW 46.61.500 or improper sudden deceleration without signaling under RCW 46.61.305(3), both of which emphasize safe operation to prevent endangering others. Penalties for brake checking, when prosecuted as reckless driving, are determined at the state level and can include fines, suspensions, and criminal charges. In , a first-time under Vehicle Code § 23103 is a punishable by a fine of up to $1,000, imprisonment for up to 90 days, and a suspension of up to 6 months, along with 2 points on the record. Washington's penalties under RCW 46.61.500 for similarly include fines up to $5,000, potential jail time of up to 364 days for a gross , and suspension ranging from 30 days to 1 year depending on the circumstances. These consequences aim to deter aggressive maneuvers that contribute to rear-end collisions. Enforcement of brake checking has intensified with the proliferation of and video evidence, enabling to issue citations and support prosecutions for based on clear visual documentation of the behavior. The (NHTSA) supports these efforts through ongoing public awareness campaigns targeting and , which encompass dangerous actions like sudden braking, with initiatives dating back to the early and continuing via resources on risky driving prevention.

International Variations

In , brake checking is classified as stunt driving under section 172 of Ontario's Highway Traffic Act, which prohibits sudden or unnecessary applications of brakes to impede another vehicle. Offenders face fines ranging from CAD 2,000 to 10,000, a 30-day driver's licence suspension, and 14-day vehicle impoundment. Similar provisions exist in other provinces, such as British Columbia's Motor Vehicle Act, which addresses dangerous or careless maneuvers including abrupt braking. In the , brake checking is prosecuted as under section 2 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, where the maneuver falls far below the standard expected of a competent driver and endangers others. Penalties include an unlimited fine, obligatory disqualification from driving, and up to two years' imprisonment. Australia's approach varies by state, with treating brake checking as a form of or under the Road Transport Act 2013, potentially leading to fines up to AUD 2,200 for negligent or without injury. In cases causing , penalties escalate to up to 7 years in prison under the Crimes Act 1900. In the , regulations differ by member state, but post-2020 developments emphasize cross-border enforcement of aggressive maneuvers through directives like the 2023 Road Safety Package (proposed in 2023 and adopted in 2025), which harmonizes disqualifications for offenses including sudden braking. In many developing countries, enforcement of brake checking remains less formalized due to resource constraints and reliance on manual policing rather than specific statutes. However, the growing adoption of traffic cameras is enhancing detection of such aggressive behaviors, as seen in evaluations of automated systems in regions like the and , leading to increased fines and awareness campaigns.

Safety and Prevention

Risks and Consequences

Brake checking, an aggressive maneuver involving the sudden and intentional application of brakes without cause, poses significant immediate dangers primarily through the heightened of rear-end collisions. The average driver requires approximately 1.5 seconds to perceive and react to a sudden stop ahead, a timeframe that can prove insufficient at typical speeds, where a traveling at 60 mph covers about 132 feet in that interval alone. This delayed response often results in the following colliding with the rear of the initiating car, and in dense traffic conditions—such as during or on multi-lane s—such incidents can cascade into multi-vehicle pileups, amplifying the severity of the crash. In terms of injury statistics, brake checking contributes to a notable portion of aggressive driving-related crashes , where rear-end collisions account for nearly 30% of all police-reported accidents annually. According to data from the Institute and NHTSA, aggressive driving behaviors—including sudden braking maneuvers like brake checking—contribute to a significant portion of fatal crashes; for example, speeding was a factor in 29% of fatal crashes in 2023, with rear-end collisions accounting for approximately 28% of all crashes but only about 4% of traffic fatalities (around 1,700 in 2022) and a higher share of crashes. Common injuries from these collisions include whiplash, affecting up to 26% of struck vehicle occupants with short-term symptoms and 7% experiencing prolonged effects, alongside more severe outcomes such as concussions, spinal injuries, and fatalities, particularly when speeds exceed 35 mph. Beyond immediate physical harm, brake checking leads to several long-term effects that extend to financial, psychological, and environmental domains. For involved drivers, an at-fault stemming from such behavior can result in premium increases of more than $800 annually, with rates remaining elevated for an average of three years depending on state regulations and insurer policies. Psychologically, survivors of these crashes face elevated risks of trauma, with (PTSD) developing in 9% to 46% of serious victims, manifesting as anxiety, flashbacks, and avoidance of driving. Environmentally, the abrupt stops and subsequent accelerations associated with brake checking waste fuel, with patterns reducing by 10% to 40% in urban conditions and contributing to higher emissions of pollutants like .

Avoidance and Mitigation Strategies

Drivers can mitigate the risk of encountering a brake check by adopting practices, such as maintaining a safe following distance using the three-second rule, which involves counting at least three seconds from when the vehicle ahead passes a fixed point until the driver's vehicle reaches the same point. This approach reduces the likelihood of provoking aggressive drivers through and provides reaction time in case of sudden braking. Additionally, techniques like calmly to create distance or avoiding and honking help prevent escalation without engaging the aggressor. Technological aids play a crucial role in avoidance and response. Modern vehicles equipped with automatic emergency braking (AEB) systems can detect imminent rear-end collisions and apply brakes autonomously, significantly reducing the impact of brake checks; these systems have been mandatory for new vehicle models in the since May 2022, with advanced pedestrian and cyclist detection required since July 2024. Recent 2024 AAA research found that AEB in 2024 model vehicles avoided 100% of forward collisions at speeds up to 35 mph. Installing dashcams provides objective video evidence of incidents, aiding in post-event reporting and legal proceedings by capturing aggressive maneuvers accurately and reliably. On a broader scale, policy recommendations emphasize education and infrastructure enhancements. Driver education programs, such as those offered by the , include modules on managing and to foster safer habits among motorists. Infrastructure improvements, including enhanced signage and pavement markings at high-risk areas like merge points and bottlenecks, have been shown to reduce driver stress and aggressive behaviors by improving and clarity.

References

  1. https://www.frantzlawgroup.com/blog/brake-checking/
  2. https://www.allcarleasing.co.uk/blog/brake-checking/
  3. https://www.lgkg.com/what-is-brake-checking/
  4. https://www.aspelllaw.com/what-is-brake-checking-and-why-do-people-do-it
  5. https://www.carparts.com/blog/what-is-brake-checking-plus-why-drivers-do-it-and-how-to-deal-with-it/
  6. https://patmaloney.com/blog/what-is-brake-checking-and-why-is-it-dangerous/
  7. https://www.lorenzoandlorenzo.com/personal-injury-guide/brake-checking/
  8. https://www.marylandaccidentlawyerblog.com/is-brake-checking-legal/
  9. https://www.dictionary.com/e/slang/brake-check/
  10. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S136984782400038X
  11. https://aaafoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/202509-AAAFTS-Aggressive-Driving.pdf
  12. https://www.apa.org/topics/anger/road-rage
  13. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022437525000866
  14. https://news.temple.edu/in-the-media/drivers-who-self-identify-their-cars-can-be-more-aggressive
  15. https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/811331.pdf
  16. https://www.lendingtree.com/insurance/aggressive-drivers-study/
  17. https://www.geotab.com/blog/aggressive-driving/
  18. https://abc13.com/post/frightening-road-rage-incident-caught-dashcam-video-101-freeway-agoura-hills-california/16565896/
  19. https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/fia_2025_formula_1_sporting_regulations_-_issue_1_-_2024-07-31.pdf
  20. https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/verstappen-given-10-second-penalty-for-causing-hamilton-clash-in-saudi-arabian-gp/6854868/
  21. https://www.autoweek.com/racing/nascar/g37029395/nascars-most-memorable-moments-at-new-hampshire/
  22. https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article/hamilton-vettel-disgraced-himself-with-clash.2df3YJHKeAKOQmU0AmcuSM
  23. https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-hamilton-vettel-baku-brake-testing-923425/923425/
  24. https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article/breaking-verstappen-handed-further-10-second-penalty-for-lap-37-collision.7GGfMvAnRIGPtMQphh7zCd
  25. https://www.the-independent.com/f1/max-verstappen-lewis-hamilton-red-bull-b2070431.html
  26. https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article/russell-and-alonso-offer-opposing-views-on-incident-that-led-to-crash-in.5mMIZKgJmq5uJTNXp5W4uk
  27. https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/68649182
  28. https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/annoyed-oscar-piastri-bites-tongue-after-penalty-costs-him-british-gp-lead/10739960/
  29. https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/vehicle-code/veh-sect-23103/
  30. https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.61.500
  31. https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.61.305
  32. https://fyourticket.com/can-you-be-charged-with-reckless-driving-from-a-video/
  33. https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/aggressive-driving
  34. https://prolink.insure/ontarios-new-stunt-driving-laws/
  35. https://cops.legal/EN/fight-traffic-ticket-charges/serious-charges/stunts-or-racing
  36. https://www.cps.gov.uk/types-crime/driving-offences
  37. https://www.carparisonleasing.co.uk/blog/brake-checking-is-dangerous-and-illegal-but-drivers-are-still-doing-it
  38. https://www.carexpert.com.au/car-news/is-it-illegal-to-brake-check-someone-who-is-tailgating-you
  39. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20250324IPR27463/agreement-on-eu-wide-rules-to-reduce-reckless-driving-while-abroad
  40. https://www.mdpi.com/2673-7590/5/1/25
  41. https://driverresearchinstitute.com/why-high-speed-rear-end-crashes-are-deadlier/
  42. https://nhtsa.gov/document/analyses-rear-end-crashes-and-near-crashes-100-car-naturalistic-driving-study-support-rear
  43. https://www.daveabels.com/blog/rear-end-collisions-frequent-type-collision/
  44. https://www.iii.org/fact-statistic/facts-statistics-aggressive-driving
  45. https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/traffic-crash-death-estimates-2022
  46. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3256773/
  47. https://www.usnews.com/insurance/auto/car-insurance-increase-accident
  48. https://www.aafp.org/pubs/afp/issues/1999/0801/p524.html
  49. https://www.ornl.gov/news/sensible-driving-saves-more-gas-drivers-think
  50. https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/us-dots-national-highway-traffic-safety-administration-urges-motorists-have-safe
  51. https://www.travelers.com/resources/auto/travel/3-second-rule-for-safe-following-distance
  52. https://www.ai-online.com/2025/01/essential-tips-to-avoid-brake-checking-accidents/
  53. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20190410IPR37528/parliament-approves-eu-rules-requiring-life-saving-technologies-in-vehicles
  54. https://newsroom.acg.aaa.com/safety-progress-in-new-automatic-emergency-braking-technology/
  55. https://www.samsara.com/products/cameras
  56. https://exchange.aaa.com/safety/senior-driver-safety-mobility/aaa-roadwise-driver/
  57. https://static.tti.tamu.edu/tti.tamu.edu/documents/4945-2.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.