[HN Gopher] The Exceptionally American Problem of Rising Roadway...
___________________________________________________________________
The Exceptionally American Problem of Rising Roadway Deaths
Author : IfOnlyYouKnew
Score : 69 points
Date : 2022-11-27 18:20 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.nytimes.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.nytimes.com)
| simonsarris wrote:
| Truly strange that there's no mention of the Obama admin
| "reforming" CAFE standards in 2012 so that the larger the
| vehicle's footprint, the worse fuel standards it needed to be
| compliant. Every single automaker went the route of making their
| vehicles larger, that is, compliant. You can no longer buy a new
| small truck in the US which is very frustrating.
|
| The timeline for CAFE standards making America's most popular
| vehicles enormous tracks with the uptick on their graph. Though
| maybe it's something else. Someone down-thread suggested "meth"
| but vehicle size seems an awful lot more likely, especially since
| its motorcyclists and pedestrians that are dying.
| p0pcult wrote:
| America is the most selfish country in the world; what else would
| expect from a country where the dominant religion and political
| party is unfettered capitalism, which runs on greed?
|
| Of course theres no political will here to do amything about
| traffic deaths.
| Maxburn wrote:
| Seems to me that enforcement throughout Covid went down. People
| noticed and I think drivers are more wild now.
| raylad wrote:
| Possible correlation to long COVID neurological damage.
|
| Similar to what happened with lead tetraethyl in the 50s-70s.
| otherme123 wrote:
| If that was true, we should see a general world trend, and
| not a "Exceptionally USA problem".
| musk_micropenis wrote:
| This is so incredibly speculative, it's borderline outrageous
| to even make the claim without something to back it.
| tehjoker wrote:
| The speculation on road traffic is not well supported, but
| neurological damage due to even mild or asymptomatic covid
| is well documented.
| jmugan wrote:
| I don't leave the house much, but on the Austin subreddit,
| people are talking about this all the time. Enforcement seems
| down and wild driving is up.
| itronitron wrote:
| Five years ago I considered Austin to have some of the worst
| drivers in the US. Although 99% of Austin drivers I consider
| to be safe and courteous the remaining 1% would drive in an
| absolutely reckless manner such as turning right from the far
| left lane, which I saw happen on more than one occasion.
| Disturbing to think that is only getting worse.
| lkrubner wrote:
| The chart shows that the uptick begins in 2014, roughly when the
| meth epidemic became a true epidemic, spreading to every part of
| the USA, so meth in particular, and drugs in general, are the
| most likely explanation. So these deaths fit in with the
| narrative of "rising deaths of despair."
|
| https://www.sciencenews.org/article/deaths-of-despair-depres...
| rufus_foreman wrote:
| Do people only do meth in America?
| jahnu wrote:
| http://tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations
| onetimeusename wrote:
| That also correlated with the times that a number of states
| began to legalize marijuana for recreational use[1]. There are
| studies looking at this relationship and finding a correlation
| between road death increases and marijuana legalization.
|
| [1]:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_cannabis_by_U.S._j...
|
| [2]" https://www.usnews.com/news/health-
| news/articles/2022-07-19/...
| pasquinelli wrote:
| i bet it correltes to a million different things.
| brookst wrote:
| Interesting correlation, but is there anything else these
| states have in common that would also correlate?
| newaccount74 wrote:
| I think the biggest factor is high fronts on trucks and SUVs that
| seem to be designed to crush pedestrians, together with
| increasingly poor visibility.
|
| We have the same problem in the EU. Pickups are not as popular
| here, but even small cars are getting SUV styling with
| pedestrian-killing hoods.
|
| I had high hopes that Tesla would make sleek and pedestrian-safer
| cars popular again: the Model X has a pretty low front for an
| SUV. Unfortunately Tesla threw all that out the window and
| designed the most effective pedestrian-crushing-device I've ever
| seen -- I hope the Cybertruck is delayed for a few more years....
| lm28469 wrote:
| Add absolute piss poor control/regulations on what's on the
| road. I've seen more crashes in a week around LA than in my
| entire life. Half the cars had bald tires, at the first sign of
| rain you saw a crash every 10-15min
|
| At least 25% of the vehicles on the roads there wouldn't be
| considered legally road worthy in western Europe
| Zak wrote:
| California appears to have an annual safety inspection, which
| many US states do not. According to the NHTSA, 6.8% of
| crashes involved a vehicle with a significant safety fault,
| which was _not necessarily_ a causal factor in the crash.
| 4.9% of crash vehicles had a tire or wheel defect.
|
| This suggests to me that there probably isn't a desperate
| need for stricter vehicle inspections in the US.
|
| https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/.
| .. (PDF)
| onetimeusename wrote:
| Maybe in a secondary sense the type of automobile is part of it
| but also I don't know why you are saying there is "increasingly
| poor visibility". There have been trucks and SUVs for decades
| now as well.
|
| My belief is that very bad habits were created by the empty
| roads in 2020 that made people start speeding. A plausible case
| can be constructed around this theory based on evidence. A lot
| of people are anecdotally familiar with this as well.
| Traffic data indicates the higher death toll was related to
| higher average speeds in conjunction with more of
| those on the roads driving under the influence of drugs
| and alcohol and a slight decline in seatbelt use.[1]
|
| Speeding increased after the pandemic lockdown.[2] There also
| appears to be an increase in road rage incidents.[3] So far in
| 2022 NHTSA says that there is an increase in road deaths for
| early 2022.[4] One theory that could explain the sustained
| increase is lower levels of traffic enforcement.
|
| [1]: https://apnews.com/article/covid-19-speeding-highway-
| deaths-...
|
| [2]: https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/pandemic-lockdowns-made-
| rus...
|
| [3]: https://www.healthline.com/health-news/road-rage-has-
| risen-d...
|
| [4]: https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/early-estimates-
| first-q...
| fasthands9 wrote:
| I don't know how much can be attributed to this but always
| seemed weird to me that the safety tests (which both are
| mandated legally and also used in marketing) are solely about
| how safe the passengers of the car will be in the event of a
| crash.
|
| It seems like a classic collective action problem. If an
| automaker has a new car design which will make its passengers
| 5% safer in a crash but passengers in the other car 10% more
| likely to die then they have incentive to do the design change
| anyways. I wouldnt know the exact numbers but would think with
| a lot of the changes (such as cars getting 1000s of lbs
| heavier) the impacts are real - especially when you factor in
| pedestrians.
| rafeto wrote:
| I don't know about other markets, but Euro NCAP
| (https://www.euroncap.com/) includes pedestrian and cyclist
| safety in their assessments and Land Rover claimed that they
| had to stop the production of the original Defender because
| it did not comply with the mandated minimum safety standards
| for pedestrians and occupants.
|
| I spent a lot of time in a 2012 Defender without any airbags
| and seats which were essentially just screwed to a
| wooden/sheet metal frame - but the high and upright seating
| position made me feel safer than do in an (objectively safer)
| sedan or hatchback.
| gnopgnip wrote:
| There are a lot of automotive standards that address
| pedestrian safety, other crash testing besides the ones for
| passengers. This is why pop up headlights and hood ornaments
| are rarely used now for example.
| Swizec wrote:
| Fun result from an old Fifth Gear episode back when SUVs were
| called "four by fours".
|
| https://youtu.be/4aCumC7sJIg
|
| The taller nose of an SUV better distributes forces across more
| of a pedestrian's body, which reduces injury. And you get
| pushed ahead of the car instead of being scooped up to hit the
| windshield with your head. This is again better for the
| pedestrian as long as the car stops in time not to run over the
| person lying on the ground.
|
| You'll notice that non-SUV noses have been getting taller and
| flatter for the past ~15 years. This is a direct result of Euro
| NCAP rules for pedestrian safety.
|
| edit: if you're downvoting, I really suggest you watch the
| linked video. It's great food for thought.
| sagarm wrote:
| This is wrong. SUVs kill pedestrians by crushing their bones
| and organs and popping their skulls like watermelons when
| they end up under the wheels. With lower hoods pedestrians
| instead go over the hood, suffering relatively minor broken
| bones and concussions.
| smcl wrote:
| Has British-English moved on from calling them "4x4"?
| atchoo wrote:
| We'd still call a genuine off road vehicle a four by four.
|
| Americans have gone a bit nuts with the SUV label - we
| don't call things like a Model Y an SUV, it's just a
| hatchback. Some other models Americans call SUVs are
| Estates or People Carriers. We probably wouldn't call
| things like a Porsche Cayenne a 4x4 because it's never
| going off road. That will happily be called an SUV with all
| the selfish egotism implied. Other names for it would be
| more deliberately insulting e.g. Chelsea Tractor etc.
| Panzer04 wrote:
| Is that true? My understanding is lower hoods roll
| pedestrians over, whereas tall, solid hoods basically bring
| them to full speed immediately, doing a bunch of damage in
| the process.
| Swizec wrote:
| You can see in the video that it's true. In their
| experiment, the lower hood, at same speed, makes the
| pedestrian hit the car 3 or 4 times instead of twice with
| the taller vehicle.
|
| Mind you the taller car was only about elbow height, not
| like some lifted trucks you see these days where the bumper
| roughly aligns with a person's hips.
| ip26 wrote:
| I can believe it, but it sure kills visibility. Children
| don't even come up to the middle of the radiator.
| paulryanrogers wrote:
| Got a link for those new rules? Or for studies about how
| higher hoods are safer for pedestrians?
| Swizec wrote:
| Yep.
|
| Euro NCAP rules for pedestrian safety:
| https://www.euroncap.com/en/vehicle-safety/the-ratings-
| expla...
|
| Notice even in the thumbnails on that page, the car has a
| much taller flatter nose than a comparable car would've in
| the early 2000's.
|
| It does look like modern SUVs are less safe than the SUVs
| of old, however. I guess they're getting too big. If you
| look at the SUV that Fifth Gear was testing with in the
| early 2000's, it basically counts as a "small compact" in
| modern USA. https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/new-study-
| suggests-todays-s...
|
| As someone else mentioned, the biggest problem may be
| turning visibility. This combined with right-turn-on-red
| creates a uniquely American safety issue.
| twblalock wrote:
| > We have the same problem in the EU.
|
| Then how does that explain why increased road deaths are
| exceptional to the USA?
| acdha wrote:
| The U.S. heavily subsidizes those vehicles and the wide roads
| & parking they require so we have tons of them. Europeans
| also buy them for the same reasons but you have to be
| especially committed to intimidating your neighbors to pay
| that much more for fuel, parking, etc. and deal with narrower
| streets.
| Karrot_Kream wrote:
| The US doesn't subsidize those vehicles. In 2008, the Obama
| government passed the CAFE emissions standards which carved
| out an exception for vehicles used for commercial purposes.
| Most pickups and large vehicles fall under this exception
| and can be profitable due to lower emissions standards.
|
| The rest is true but a bit complicated. The US Federal
| government subsidizes arterials which gives local
| governments an incentive to build more arterials so they
| can receive more federal funding.
| acdha wrote:
| The lower emissions standards are a form of subsidy, as
| are not requiring them to be as safe is required by many
| of our peer countries, but my larger point was that the
| U.S. has had a century of car-centric, bordering on car-
| only, infrastructure. That has shaped every part of our
| country from pushing highways through cities to having
| the design code used by most cities and states hyper-
| focused on wide roads optimized for vehicle speeds over
| safety. There are some cases where following that is
| linked to federal funding but most DOTs follow the
| federal guidelines closely even on projects they're
| funding entirely locally.
|
| The other big one is gas: we put huge political efforts
| into keeping prices low, which disproportionately
| benefits people buying new vehicles which get 1970s-era
| mileage.
| Karrot_Kream wrote:
| Right I'm just trying to add more detail here so that
| folks in the US who want to deconstruct this car
| dependency can work with the system. That these subsidies
| and carve outs are so varied is what makes it so hard to
| pushback against American car dependency.
| adgjlsfhk1 wrote:
| parent's point was that the infrastructure we build acts
| as subsidy. A pickup truck is a lot more desirable if
| your country increases pays a bunch of money to increase
| road widths. European roads are typically 8 or 9 feet per
| lane while US roads are often 10-12 ft per lane.
| Karrot_Kream wrote:
| Right, I was adding more detail as to why US roads are
| wider, they're arterials. That and signal spacing and
| lane width is based solely around throughput in most of
| the US.
|
| Too much online literature throws around "subsidizes"
| blindly without going deeper.
| leoedin wrote:
| I was totally shocked by the shape of truck grills last time
| I visited Canada. The standard F150-esque chassis used for
| all sorts of commercial vehicles is fronted by a huge slab of
| steel. And those things are everywhere - it's not just the
| obvious "manly truck lovers", but all sorts of commercial
| vehicles where it's totally unnecessary. In Toronto the parks
| service are all driving around in those trucks. As the parent
| of a 2 year old, they are SCARY - the blind spot in front
| must be massive.
|
| In Europe we mostly use van derived chassis for commercial
| vehicles. Ford Transits or Fiat Ducato (Dodge Ram Promaster
| in NA). They seem to be able to serve the same purpose
| without having terrifying blind spots.
| sam_lowry_ wrote:
| I've been in front collisions with European cars a couple
| of times, they are designed to fold in and down, first
| protecting the pedestrian and then the legs of the
| driver/passenger.
|
| It's amazing how they fold at the slightest hit.
| rightbyte wrote:
| > I've been in front collisions with European cars a
| couple of times
|
| I hope you doing some sort of crash rally?
| throwaway294566 wrote:
| Because, while the same problem exists, it doesn't exist to
| the same extent. The average size of the vehicles is smaller,
| even bigger European SUVs are far smaller than what americans
| call trucks. And there are less of the really big and deadly
| ones, almost none with a neck-breaking-bar, etc.
| S_A_P wrote:
| While I agree that styling elements that are outright
| pedestrian harmful(a row of spear heads across the grill, etc)
| should be banned, I also HATE the way that these same
| regulations are making all cars look the same. Maybe folks who
| don't like cars don't care. I DO care what a car looks like.
|
| As someone who also would not like to meet his demise by an
| errant vehicle, I think I would rather see a bunch of safety
| tech designed to not hit pedestrians in the first place would
| be ideal. Auto stop seems to be getting pretty good and while
| you could never eliminate vehicle to pedestrian crashes(suicide
| by car is likely impossible to protect against in many
| scenarios) But I hope we can stop making all the cars look like
| a shin destroying tear drop. :)
| browningstreet wrote:
| Purely anecdotal: I work from home but one day per week head out
| during rush hour and drive across town for a gym appointment. I
| almost never drive between 4p-6p anymore -- my usual gym hours
| are 5am. The rush hour commute is crazy and scary enough that I
| have considered cancelling it.
|
| One factor I notice is most drivers have their phone up in front
| of their faces. And at least during rush hour, the biggest trucks
| are driving pretty slow and the smaller more random drivers
| definitely correlate to smart phone obsessed drivers. Lots of
| sudden moves.
|
| Further, people on the freeway totally obsessed with their phones
| are easy to spot: lane drifting and driving speeds that are
| typically inconsistent with the prevailing speed of the cars
| around them.
|
| I drive a Tesla and use auto pilot almost all the time (I don't
| have FSD). When you're going a very consistent speed, the
| inconsistent behavior of the cars around you feels way more
| prevalent.
|
| Another potential factor: left lane highway driving. I drove in a
| 3rd world country this summer and they were very consistent about
| driving in the right lane and only passing in the left lane. No
| one at all drove in the left lane. I think left lane driving in
| the US leads to more risky maneuvers and road rage responses.
| khalilravanna wrote:
| The consistent speed thing is so crazy to me as someone who
| almost always uses cruise control. Why don't more people use
| it? (Pretty sure it's been standard on every car since like
| 2005?) If people used cruise control and stayed in their lane
| most of the time (i.e. not switching lanes constantly to try
| and "get ahead") I feel like traffic would improve noticeably
| everywhere.
|
| When I drove in Germany it was eye opening to no longer be the
| exception as a person actually following the rules and not
| driving like someone on amphetamines in a rush for a meeting.
| It's the same feeling when you work at a company with bad
| management and then work at one with good management: "You mean
| I can just trust you to do your job...?" -> "You mean I can
| trust you to drive a car at high speeds without killing me...?"
| ghaff wrote:
| >(Pretty sure it's been standard on every car since like
| 2005?)
|
| Only have had adaptive cruise control the past few months.
|
| I had regular cruise control for ages. I mostly stopped using
| it. On roads with any amount of traffic, I found it
| encouraged driving in a way that prioritized maintaining
| speed no matter what including getting close or changing
| lanes when it really wasn't necessary. And if I just
| constantly overrode it, why bother using it?
| alar44 wrote:
| Because it makes you more predictable to other drivers.
| ghaff wrote:
| Staying in a lane while also maintaining appropriate
| distances seems better than focusing on maintaining
| constant speed in traffic. The key is whether you can
| maintain a reasonable constant speed relative to traffic
| without changing lanes.
|
| Basically, always driving at exactly the speed limit to
| the degree possible is a questionable heuristic when
| there are a lot of cars.
| golemiprague wrote:
| timeon wrote:
| > most drivers have their phone up in front of their faces
|
| I've noticed this as well (but I'm not in US).
| bluedino wrote:
| I wondered if it's only common in the US
| 6LLvveMx2koXfwn wrote:
| It was common in the UK too until it was made illegal [1],
| still happens, but less so.
|
| 1. https://www.gov.uk/using-mobile-phones-when-driving-the-
| law
| pessimizer wrote:
| > people on the freeway totally obsessed with their phones are
| easy to spot: lane drifting
|
| Drift, _JERK_ , drift, _JERK_. It 's the mating dance of people
| who can't stop twittering, facebooking, or texting for even a
| second.
| compiskey wrote:
| It's simple; the zeitgeist of the US is to "love freedom" to not
| care.
|
| The lack of 24/7 protest for universal healthcare is tacit
| admission on the part of the public; "no one else's life is my
| responsibility".
|
| So long as the masses are not looking to revolt against it, US
| government policy, government empowered by public apathy to
| demand otherwise, is "thoughts and prayers."
|
| Make road deaths about one specific design choice, or specific
| thing and even with all the evidence in the world, you'll run
| into indifference to change, and push harder, lawsuits to prevent
| change.
|
| The US is a narcissistic culture that describes applying agency
| to protect each other (universal healthcare as an example again)
| as tyrannical subjugation of free agency. We're policed into
| compliance through threat of legal repercussions.
| rufus_foreman wrote:
| The US has near universal health care. Most people have it
| through their jobs, old people have it through Medicare, and
| people without jobs, in most of the states in the US have it
| through Medicare expansion.
|
| There is still a coverage gap, it's small and shrinking.
|
| Using that as some sort of explanation for why people are dying
| on the roads in the US compared to the rest of the world
| explains nothing.
| myroon5 wrote:
| > near universal
|
| For those that prefer numbers, nonelderly Americans were ~17%
| uninsured pre-ACA, ~11% uninsured post-ACA:
|
| https://www.kff.org/uninsured/issue-brief/key-facts-about-
| th...
| compiskey wrote:
| Coupling healthcare to a job is exploitative. Those business
| owners are not owed anyone's labor. If they can only survive
| given politically correct shackles on social agency, they
| should not exist as businesses.
| _aavaa_ wrote:
| Healthcare was not coupled to jobs in order to exploit
| employees. It was a response to government interventions
| preventing companies from paying employees more and so the
| companies started offering healthcare plans as part of
| their benefits _in order to pay people more_ [0].
|
| [0]: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/05/upshot/the-real-
| reason-th...
| compiskey wrote:
| An origin story that, if true, we weren't there, means
| nothing. The justification to avoid change now is, often
| but not always, the impact it would have to employers
| ability to hire.
|
| It's a problem that can be legislated away with public
| scrutiny and effort. This kind of history is irrelevant
| to next steps; it's not like advocating for a literal
| holocaust. The figurative identity of a business owner is
| not my problem.
|
| Just expressing where my indifference for others lies.
| Keep people alive, figuratively kill coddled businesses.
| jmugan wrote:
| Let's try to have a more nuanced discussion. My sister is an ER
| doctor in the US; we don't turn people away. Clearly, we need a
| better healthcare system, but it's not because the US is
| narcissistic.
| rqtwteye wrote:
| "My sister is an ER doctor in the US; we don't turn people
| away."
|
| They make them wait for hours, make people who are in very
| bad shape fill out paperwork before treatment and then charge
| astronomical and seemingly totally made up prices. The US
| definitely has the spirit "I have got mine, I deserve it and
| fuck everybody else"
| jmugan wrote:
| Yeah, but you wait and fill out paperwork even if you are
| paying. Clearly, we need to improve things.
| jmugan wrote:
| Everyone agrees it is a terrible system. The high prices
| are because many people cannot pay, and the wait is because
| many people have no where else to go. We just can't seem to
| get from our system to a better one, but it's not because
| we are evil. Our healthcare system is in a stuck bad state
| and change is complicated.
|
| Prescription drugs are a whole other thing. Those high
| prices are because you will die if you don't get the drugs.
| That's a relatively easy fix, and there is no excuse for
| our government not taking action on that.
| compiskey wrote:
| ERs do not turn people away, but much of ER traffic is due to
| skipping preventative care due to lack of financial resources
| or insurance.
|
| Refusal to avoid the outcome of more serious health issues by
| putting funding into it is because that funding has to go
| elsewhere to make next quarters numbers.
|
| I'm not going to debate this. I've been in the room with big
| tech leaders and political figures who speak in no uncertain
| terms behind closed doors; their goal is to keep power and
| their methods are designed intentionally to make people
| believe their power is immutable truth. We are indeed
| demanded of by normal humans with extremely narcissistic
| personalities and an innumerate public that cheers them on.
| steve76 wrote:
| anonmedical wrote:
| They might not turn you away, but they'll definitely ask for
| a credit card while you're lying their nearly dying, and then
| send you a bill that will bankrupt you. When this happened to
| me I had suicidal ideation for a while after, as much as I'd
| like to not admit it.
|
| An ER doctor friend of mine at a large hospital in NYC told
| me after I had a medical emergency that you should always
| leave your wallet at home and leave a fake name and address
| if you're uninsured. They'll give you care and then you won't
| have to pay. He said as a doctor he's going to save you no
| matter what.
| feet wrote:
| How are people going to protest when they need to work
| constantly just to make ends-meet
| bluedino wrote:
| Plenty of people protested during the summer of 2020
| compiskey wrote:
| Yep and plenty of people I've encountered across the US
| call them freedom hating terrorists.
| simonswords82 wrote:
| Which is surely by design. People who are just about able to
| keep their heads above water and in fear of a huge medical
| bill (or any bill for that matter) will literally work like
| their lives depend on it...because it does.
| brookst wrote:
| I don't believe there is any kind of conspiracy or design
| in a system this complex. It's all emergent behavior.
|
| If there was anyone powerful and omniscient enough to
| design all of these second- and third-order effects, I
| don't think there enough competence in the world to see the
| design implemented across hundreds of millions of people in
| a way that produces the desired effects.
|
| IMO much more likely it's a mindless vicious circle of
| human nature.
| compiskey wrote:
| It's behavior that's emerged over and over in the past:
| https://www.nytimes.com/1997/02/27/business/job-
| insecurity-o...
|
| It's emergent behavior given your relative experience to
| this point. It is not "net new" behavior for the species.
| rayiner wrote:
| > The lack of 24/7 protest for universal healthcare is tacit
| admission on the part of the public; "no one else's life is my
| responsibility".
|
| Remind me, what was that thing Obama did?
| compiskey wrote:
| Peddled Mitt Romney's 1990 health plan in 2010? And what did
| numerous states do since to make it worse to slow/prevent
| change? Lawsuits.
|
| Being socially behind the rest of the world by 30-ish years
| is about right for the US.
|
| That it was a tenable Republican plan in 1990 and a
| tyrannical expansion of government to Republicans by 2010
| just highlights the social regression.
| simonswords82 wrote:
| Whilst the message is quite blunt this subreddit does a good job
| of highlighting just how much of our world's urban planning and
| infrastructure is built around cars:
|
| https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars
|
| Until I stumbled across this it had not occurred to me how much
| people (and walking) are placed second to cars and
| infrastructure. Surely this needs to change going forward.
| cscurmudgeon wrote:
| There is also a uniquely American trend of not enforcing traffic
| laws in the name of social justice.
|
| https://www.denver7.com/news/national/cities-and-states-bann...
|
| https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/15/us/police-traffic-stops.h...
|
| Over time, things add up.
|
| A really curious person will ask if the drop in enforcement
| correlates with rise in deaths. They seem to start at the same
| time.
| mmmpop wrote:
| Aside from the seatbelt infraction, which of these violations
| have anything to do with an increase in highway fatalities? Are
| you suggesting something along the lines of the broken windows
| theory of deviance?
| cscurmudgeon wrote:
| Do you think it is remotely plausible that:
|
| P(causing death | minor violation ) > P(causing death | ~
| minor violation)
|
| Also:
|
| P(reckless driving | without cops) > P(reckless driving |
| cops)
|
| Here let me one step further and present data:
|
| > California to Stop Towing, Impounding Vehicles of
| Unlicensed Drivers
|
| https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/california-
| impounding-...
|
| "According to a study conducted by the California Department
| of Motor Vehicles, unlicensed drivers are almost three times
| more likely to cause a fatal crash than licensed drivers."
|
| https://www.berginjurylawyers.com/blog/auto-
| accident/unlicen...
|
| Is NYTimes so journalistically lazy/corrupt that they
| couldn't connect two obvious pieces of facts?
| halffaday wrote:
| Yes.
|
| I think the opinion NYT is programming into their readers
| is that normal people owning the means of private
| transportation is bad. The particular facts or coherence of
| the argument is immaterial.
|
| Just believe the opposite of whatever Pravda says and
| you'll be a'ight.
| mmmpop wrote:
| I don't know and I'm not participating in this conversation
| further because of your stealth edit for the NYT piece.
| Also you're making what I perceive to be a bad-faith
| argument which was reinforced by your altering your
| original post in a significant way without saying as much.
| binarymax wrote:
| In my town, the previous mayor had all the red light cameras
| removed, as it was considered a regressive tax. But now, the
| number of people that blaze through just-changed red lights
| is out of control. So the fix? The delay between red to green
| was increased. Some intersections now have a 5 to 10 second
| overlap of reds to allow for all the maniacs to speed through
| the just-changed light.
| erik_seaberg wrote:
| The yellow lights might be too short. Cameras are notorious
| for that because the incentives are wrong; both the vendor
| and the city want revenue from issuing fines.
| et-al wrote:
| Road deaths aren't limited to just highway fatalities.
|
| Or are you suggesting that collisions at higher speeds, or
| from running red lights won't increase the chances of
| injuries for both pedestrians or occupants in cars?
| mmmpop wrote:
| I still am not reading the NYT piece but the original
| Denver7 piece which lists these infractions: - Driving with
| a broken taillight - Not wearing a seatbelt - Driving with
| minor damage to a bumper - Driving with a registration that
| has been expired for less than two months - Relocating a
| license plate to another visible part of the vehicle -
| Obstruction of view (such as an air freshener placed on the
| rearview mirror)
|
| The OP added the other article after posting and realizing
| the weakness of the argument with just the first source, so
| I'm not addressing it.
| jeffbee wrote:
| Obstruction of the view should be the #1 thing that gets
| you pulled over. It kills pedestrians! You can't have
| crap hanging on your mirror and you can't mount your
| stupid iphone right in the middle of the windshield,
| either.
| bluedino wrote:
| This is my guess. Everyone just drives like a psycho. 65 in a
| 40 zone, 90+ in 70mph highways, after a light turns red you
| have to wait 2-3 seconds for that car or two that run it.
|
| Then you have people pulling out into traffic, turning left
| from the right lane, stopping for no reason in the middle of
| the road...
|
| Combine that with 1 in 8 drivers not even having car insurance
| (it's over 20% in some states), the amount of irresponsibility
| is mind-boggling.
| sheeeep86 wrote:
| I would love to see these numbers correlated with the number of
| large pickups that are driving on the roads. These types of cars
| offer no pedestrian safety and are more and more common in the
| US.
| muti wrote:
| https://archive.ph/sEmh5
| mym1990 wrote:
| A lot of American incentives are purely aligned to generating
| revenue or power through lobbying. I would be hard pressed to
| imagine that cycling or pedestrian unions have any kind of pull
| compared to large automakers. I absolutely love cycling through a
| city that has the infrastructure for it, and opt to walk to
| anything less than a mile away. I have been hit twice while
| riding a motorcycle, the first time was nearly fatal. I also
| drive a truck. So I guess I am the embodiment of all the good and
| bad of the system :( Definitely cognizant that I drive a danger
| machine though.
| stevenwoo wrote:
| For whatever reason, motorcyclists' deaths are about up 10x
| times pedestrian/cyclist deaths over the same time period in
| the USA according to that graphic accompanying the article.
| Genuinely curious as non motorcyclist - is there awareness of
| this or collective outrage among the motorcyclists' community?
| mym1990 wrote:
| I am not sure to be honest, as I don't ride anymore(I figured
| 3rd strike will be the one that gets me).
|
| There is a quote that seems to ring true to me: "There's two
| types of riders; those who have crashed, and those who will."
| Most new riders don't believe it, but the truth is that
| whether you crash or not is almost never in your control, and
| being naive of this will just get you killed faster.
| Unfortunately, death seems to be something that is ever
| present if you are part of a bigger rider community, a lot of
| riders know someone close that passed away.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-11-27 23:01 UTC)