5 Surprising Foreign Laws That Put Travelers at Risk

Too often, travelers jump into rental vehicles and start driving without adjusting their side-view mirrors properly. Sure, many drivers do adjust their side-view mirrors. But some do it the wrong way, risking blind spots that can lead to accidents. The most important thing to keep in mind, says The Society of Automotive Engineers, is this: You shouldn't see any part of your own vehicle reflected in the side-view mirrors. If your side-view mirrors show the sides of your own vehicle, then the mirrors aren't pointing outward enough. So, you may not see cars coming from behind. This advice on mirrors also applies to personal vehicles, obviously. But it's when people are renting a car that they most often have to re-adjust side-view and rear-view mirror settings. Car and Driver has taken the Society's advice, which is based on crash data and driver surveys, to create a simple chart on how to adjust your rear-view and side-view mirrors. The following chart is courtesy of its article How To: Adjust Your Mirrors to Avoid Blind Spots, via Lifehacker. SEE MORE FROM BUDGET TRAVEL Zipcar Is Driving Competition in Rental Cars You'll Never Guess the Highest-Rated Car Rental Agency Hertz Changes Its Loyalty Program

Here's proof that when there's little competition at an airport, travelers pay a hefty price. Wanna clear demonstration of the so-called "Southwest Airlines effect" in action? The phenomenon describes the way airfares drop when big "legacy" carriers are forced to compete on routes with other airlines, specifically low-cost airlines such as Southwest. The Minneapolis Star-Tribune recently reported the findings of a study about the impact low-cost carriers had on the fares paid by passengers. The major local airport, Minneapolis-St. Paul (MSP), is the 11th most expensive gateway in the country, according to the Department of Transportation. MSP also happens to be dominated by Delta Airlines, which accounts for more than 80 percent of the domestic flights in two of the airlines' terminals. On routes at MSP that only Delta flies, the average one-way fare is $218. When Delta competes on a route with another legacy carrier, such as United or American, the average fare goes down to $200. And when Southwest or another low-cost carrier competes on a route with Delta, the average price for a one-way ticket is $159. That's 27 percent cheaper than the average fare on Delta-only routes. This scenario, in which a monopoly yields higher prices for passengers, is hardly limited to Minneapolis. For years, Cincinnati-Northern Kentucky International Airport (CVG) has been infamous for consistently hosting fares among the highest in the nation, on average. Like at MSP, the routes flown to and from CVG are dominated by one airline in particular. Yep, it's Delta. Delta also has a huge presence in Atlanta. But ATL is among the country's biggest, busiest airports, and Delta must compete with low-cost AirTran (which has a hub there) and tons of other carriers that use the gateway. As a result, ATL winds up being a reasonably priced place to fly to, through, or from: It ranks as the nation's 45th most expensive major airport. MORE FROM BUDGET TRAVEL: What Makes Your Least Favorite Airport So Awful? ?src=blgrc">Should Airlines Have to Allow One Checked Bag By Law? 5 Airport Innovations Worth Praising

if (WIDGETBOX) WIDGETBOX.renderWidget('40ed3393-59bf-4f4c-ab86-2f900217a19d');Get the Poll Creator Pro widget and many other great free widgets at Widgetbox! Not seeing a widget? (More info)I've probably come across two other people in my life who, like me, actually find air travel relaxing. Sleeping on the plane? Not a problem for people like us—on my last flight, I was completely out before the plane even took off. We're also the people who don't think twice when faced with the prospect of booking a red–eye. Since I live on the East Coast and have family on the West Coast, the red–eye has become a way of life for me. In fact, I'm on the hunt for them when I'm booking travel. Sure, an arrival time of 5:15am can be a little daunting, but for me, it beats losing an entire day—one that could've been spent basking in the California sun—sitting in a cramped seat with restricted airflow and, if I'm lucky, a tiny window. (Yes, somehow I do still manage to find flying relaxing.) I'll opt for the overnight even if it means rolling straight from the airport into work (or for years before that, into class). This habit has been good to my budget—many times, I've saved money by booking that time slot that no one else seemed to want. And there are plenty of other benefits to opting for red–eye flights—just take a look at how bloggers Julie Schwietert and Lynn Rosen go to bat for them in these 2008 and 2009 articles. Better records for meeting arrival and departure times, less crowded planes (and often, airports), and savings? But even in the face of all this reasoning, whenever I talk about taking a Sunday–to–Monday–morning red–eye, I still hear "Are you crazy?" a lot more often than, "Me too!" or, "Hmm, I should try that." So I'm curious: are there more of us out there? What's your take on red-eye flights: love 'em, or leave 'em? MORE FROM BUDGET TRAVEL Are quick trips abroad worth the travel time? Holiday Travel: To Go Home Or Go Away 5 Ways Travelers Can Avoid Crowds This Holiday Season

Last week, the House of Representatives voted unanimously in favor of a preference system for the Armed Forces at public airports. Earlier this year, when United joined its merger partner, Continental, in allowing uniformed military personnel to board planes first—before, even, first–class passengers, disabled passengers, and families with infants—the news sparked a passionate response on our blog, with most comments in favor of the measure. Last week, the House of Representatives went a step further in helping to ease travel burdens for our servicemen. Members voted unanimously—404 to 0—to allow military travelers on official duty to move through airport security checks faster. According to the chief sponsor of the bill, Representative Chip Cravaack of Minnesota, that could mean troops not having to remove their boots, belt buckles, military jackets, and medals. Soldiers could be moved to the front of the security line, or a separate line could be created. "The main emphasis is expediting troops through a security process that wasn't made for them," Cravaack told the Associated Press. In the end, Homeland Security would establish the specific rules of the proposed preferential system. The legislation is now in the Senate. If it becomes law, the earliest recipients would most likely be troops returning home from Afghanistan in 2012, along with their family members, who also would get preferential treatment. So far, the move has earned raves from travel–industry groups. Already, the government has initiated a more intelligence–driven screening process for civilian passengers, allowing members of some frequent–flier programs to voluntarily register information about themselves ahead of time for expedited security screening. The new process is currently being tested at major airports in Atlanta, Detroit, Miami, and Dallas and will likely expand nation–wide in 2012. Echoing these moves, some supporters of the new House bill are advocating for these new, eased airport–security screening privileges to extend to law enforcement officers and firefighters, too. What do you think? Should policemen and firefighters be allowed to pass through airport security more quickly than other passengers, alongside members of the military? MORE FROM BUDGET TRAVEL 4 Common Airport Security Questions—Answered! 7 Surprising Items That Set Off Airport Security New Shoelaces Ready for Airport Security