It recently came to light that in states like New York and Pennsylvania, the long barrier often found along highways, especially on curves or steep drop-offs, is technically referred to as a “guide rail” rather than a “guard rail.” This distinction, as revealed by discussions across various online forums, stems from legal considerations where lawyers successfully argued that Departments of Transportation were liable in accidents because these barriers, despite being advertised as guarding motorists from harm, sometimes failed to do so.
A long guide rail installed on the side of a highway.
One such explanation can be found on https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=14700.0, highlighting the legal rationale behind the terminology shift:
Re: Guardrail vs Guiderail ¶ « Reply #5 on: February 07, 2015, 03:19:56 PM » I had a law class in high school (in Pennsylvania) where the teacher was very quick to correct anyone who said “guardrail”, saying that, for legal reasons, it doesn’t definitively guard against a vehicle running off the road but instead attempts to guide it back on course.
Guide Rail is a term that was created because of the accident lawyers suing the state, claiming that “Guard Rails” didn’t guard vehicles from crashing through them. This claim was made again a few years ago by a lawyer working for the father of a kid who got tanked well over the limit, then crashed through numerous signs and rails and drowned in the Union Canal. ¶ The rails were never designed to prevent all vehicles from crashing through them, but rather to re-direct errant vehicles back on to the travelled way. Despite the sad feelings of a family losing a loved one, they were never intended to guard drunk drivers from meeting tragic ends to their lives. ¶ Yet lawyers still try to make that claimt, so the word “Guard” was replaced with “Guide” in all of the legal documents. A few of the design geek-types that Val referred to will always use that term to sound official, but everyone else uses the word guard in ordinary speech.
This change in terminology underscores a critical point: these roadside barriers are designed to redirect vehicles back onto the road rather than provide an absolute guarantee against accidents. The term “guide rail” more accurately reflects their intended function.
The Legal and Practical Implications
The shift from “guard rail” to “guide rail” is not merely semantic; it has significant legal implications. By using “guide rail,” Departments of Transportation aim to mitigate potential liability in accidents. The argument is that these structures guide vehicles, acknowledging that they cannot guard against all possible scenarios.
However, this raises a pertinent question: what happens when a “guide rail” fails to guide a vehicle back onto the road? Could legal action then be pursued against transportation authorities for failing to provide adequate guidance? The legal landscape surrounding these barriers remains complex and subject to interpretation.
Beyond Roadside Barriers: Other Applications
It’s important to note that “guide rails” and “guard rails” are also used in other contexts. For instance, concrete or steel barriers that steer commuter trains at airports are legitimately called guide rails, as they actively guide the trains along a specific path. Similarly, guard rails are commonly found around high-up vista points to prevent falls, effectively guarding individuals from potential harm.
Steel guard rails installed to prevent people from falling off a high vista point.
Common Sense and Terminology
Ultimately, the debate over “guide rail” versus “guard rail” highlights the tension between legal precision and common-sense understanding. While “guide rail” may be the legally preferred term for roadside barriers, the reality is that these structures attempt to both guide and guard. Perhaps a more balanced perspective is needed, one that acknowledges the limitations of these barriers while recognizing their crucial role in enhancing road safety.
In conclusion, whether you call them guide rails or guard rails, understanding their intended function and limitations is crucial for both drivers and legal entities. The ongoing discussion reflects a broader conversation about responsibility, safety, and the language we use to describe the world around us.
