Security Guards Stopping Traffic

[599hornet]

My question involves a traffic question from the state of: Indiana

In downtown Indianapolis around 5pm there are many parking garages that employ security guards to stop traffic to let the cars out of the garages. Many of these streets are 4 lanes and some of the guards stop all 4 lanes of traffic which is very unreasonable. I can see stopping the closest 2 lanes but backing up traffic by stopping all 4 lanes isnt right. I dont see it any different than me, a private citizen, standing in the street and stopping traffic. So im wondering since these guys are not police officers and obviously have no authority to enforce the law do i really have to stop for them if i am in the far lane and am not causing a danger to the traffic coming out of the garage? Thanks!

[BOR]

My initial inclination was to say they possess no power to do so on a "day to day basis", as opposed to a one time deal, BUT your posts says MANY parking garages do it?? If such is a common practice, it would seem likely it is permitted by ordinance/state law, but then again, it may just never have been challenged??

I would not test it by disobeying thier directive order though? Write a letter to the City Law director for an opinion, see if he or she responds??


NON police can also direct/control traffic, such as flagmen who are working on a road, repaving etc.

[599hornet]

My initial inclination was to say they possess no power to do so on a "day to day basis", as opposed to a one time deal, BUT your posts says MANY parking garages do it?? If such is a common practice, it would seem likely it is permitted by ordinance/state law, but then again, it may just never have been challenged??

I would not test it by disobeying thier directive order though? Write a letter to the City Law director for an opinion, see if he or she responds??


NON police can also direct/control traffic, such as flagmen who are working on a road, repaving etc.

I don’t think they have the power to do so either. The main problem is that they stop all 4 lanes of traffic, most of the other garages only stop the 2 nearest lanes to avoid backing traffic up, however there are 2 garages that stop all 4 lanes, which is ridiculous.

They are definitely not acting in the same capacity as a flag man etc. they are doing it for convenience to the people who use the garage not a safety issue, I have the info to call the city so I may do that soon.

Thanks for the reply, any other suggestions or info on this issue would be appreciated.

[blewis]

The guards may or may not be authorized by law, but the consequences for disobeying them could be catastrophic. Consider, as an example, a Jaywalker. It may be illegal to cross where there is no crosswalk, but if you actually run over a jaywalker, and your defense is that they had no legal right to be there, and, therefore, you did not have to stop, guess who's going to lose? The same would apply, IMHO, to your situation. If the security guard signals you to stop, and you refuse, and there is a resulting collision, and your defense is that the guard had no legal right to try to stop you, guess who's going to lose that one?

Just my $.02,

Barry

[599hornet]

The guards may or may not be authorized by law, but the consequences for disobeying them could be catastrophic. Consider, as an example, a Jaywalker. It may be illegal to cross where there is no crosswalk, but if you actually run over a jaywalker, and your defense is that they had no legal right to be there, and, therefore, you did not have to stop, guess who's going to lose? The same would apply, IMHO, to your situation. If the security guard signals you to stop, and you refuse, and there is a resulting collision, and your defense is that the guard had no legal right to try to stop you, guess who's going to lose that one?

Just my $.02,

Barry

I understand what you are saying, however, my defense wouldnt be that they had no legal right to be there, i have the right of way.

[blewis]

I don't know about Indiana, but in WA our law reads:

Obedience to police officers, flaggers, or firefighters — Penalty.

(1) No person shall willfully fail or refuse to comply with any lawful order or direction of any duly authorized flagger or any police officer or firefighter invested by law with authority to direct, control, or regulate traffic.

(2) A violation of this section is a misdemeanor.

Now, the question might become: are these security guards "duly authorized"? Note, also, that failure to obey is a criminal offense, as opposed to a "traffic infraction".

However, whether authorized or not, you've still got the situation where you have been given notice to stop. Another driver has been given notice to proceed. If there is a collision, I don't think the courts will accept your "I've got the right-of-way" argument. Case law, at least in WA, holds that the "preferred" driver (even if you're right and that is you) must YIELD the right-of-way at the point in time where he/she realizes that the "non-preferred" driver is NOT going to yield (which you should have realized when the guard motioned the other car to go).

Again, this is WA law not IN. The statutes and case laws may be different.

Barry

[599hornet]

I don't know about Indiana, but in WA our law reads:Now, the question might become: are these security guards "duly authorized"? Note, also, that failure to obey is a criminal offense, as opposed to a "traffic infraction".

However, whether authorized or not, you've still got the situation where you have been given notice to stop. Another driver has been given notice to proceed. If there is a collision, I don't think the courts will accept your "I've got the right-of-way" argument. Case law, at least in WA, holds that the "preferred" driver (even if you're right and that is you) must YIELD the right-of-way at the point in time where he/she realizes that the "non-preferred" driver is NOT going to yield (which you should have realized when the guard motioned the other car to go).

Again, this is WA law not IN. The statutes and case laws may be different.

Barry

Thanks, i'll check it out and see if IN includes "duly authorized" flaggers.