Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Oslo had 0 pedestrian, 0 cyclist, 0 children and 1 driver trafic deaths in 2019

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 524 posts

Re: Oslo had 0 pedestrian, 0 cyclist, 0 children and 1 driver trafic deaths in 2019

#221

Post by ossworkerrights »

ozim wrote: post #167
ossworkerrights wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a stark contrast to Romania, which had almost 2000 deaths at a population only 4 times larger than norway. Wondering what are the lessons to learn and apply to that country as the situation is out of control.

I am from Poland have not been to Norway but I live in the Netherlands. I have been to Romania for work for about two months. It is mostly driving culture, I noticed in Romania people have to get quick everywhere because of "reasons". They have a car so they feel important. Like "out of the way pesants on foot". There was a lot of bad roads, and romanian people I was working with, mostly complained about roads being…

Spot on regarding "reasons". There is a reason for anything people do bad around here. Literally anything. And your statement "thinking they are more important" applies to pretty much everything and everyone whom improved their situation a little bit: they think a higher standard of living means stepping on others. Really poor state of affairs, and sadly it creates loads of victims, be it on the road or in hospitals or otherwise.

Re: Oslo had 0 pedestrian, 0 cyclist, 0 children and 1 driver trafic deaths in 2019

#222

Post by chapium »

testplzignore wrote: post #211
alistairSH wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US, pedestrian signals do NOT signal when it’s safe to cross. Cars almost always have a green in the same direction, meaning they can turn into you. I almost get run over once a month because of this.

Where I live in the US, my understanding is that pedestrians always have the right of way at intersections (regardless of whether there are any traffic or pedestrian signals) unless: 1. There is a pedestrian signal that says to NOT cross, or 2. The traffic signal going in the direction the pedestrian is walking is red. So if the light is green and the pedestrian signal does not say to not cross, then the pedestrian h…

Right of way is for pedestrians on any road in the US, however you can be arrested for public nuisance on a busy non pedestrian toad such as an exit expressway.

Re: Oslo had 0 pedestrian, 0 cyclist, 0 children and 1 driver trafic deaths in 2019

#223

Post by TomMarius »

glofish wrote: post #214
TomMarius wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I live next to a subway and tram stations (trams have dedicated tracks not shared with car in most places here) and the car is still a better option, it's an issue with the public transport system and people driving do not make it much worse. The subway is not affected at all and yet the number of trains per hour has stayed constant for years.

What is your point exactly? That it is possible that there a few individuals for whom driving is more advantageous than public transport? Of course, it is possible. Is it likely that if everyone drove instead of taking public transport driving would become unbearable for everyone, you included? Of course again. So what are you arguing for exactly? That everyone should drive? Are you looking for absolution for liking…

A few = hundreds of thousands cars daily? That's not "a few" to me (out of 1.5 million citizens city).

Re: Oslo had 0 pedestrian, 0 cyclist, 0 children and 1 driver trafic deaths in 2019

#224

Post by YeGoblynQueenne »

MereInterest wrote: post #178
vegardx wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like a cultural problem, not a crosswalk light problem. Most people (myself included) automatically slow down when driving into a crosswalk. Our intersections are usually fairly small, so it's hard to build up any speed, even if you wanted to.

Oh, it is definitely a huge cultural problem. In the US, many drivers will ignore the existence of pedestrians altogether. For example, pulling up to an intersection and only looking to the left before making a right turn, because that is the only direction that car traffic can be coming from. It isn't every car by any means, but enough cars that pedestrians need to assume that drivers are incompetent until given evi…

>> Oh, it is definitely a huge cultural problem. In the US, many drivers will ignore the existence of pedestrians altogether.

Strange, because most likely the majority of drivers also walk at least a short distance around the same cities they drive into.

In the US in particular, eyballing the number of cars and the number of pedestrians in images of places like New York etc that I've seen, it's very hard to believe that there's a clear line separating all those people walking about from all those people who drive cars, other than the specific time of day they do one or the other.

So you'd think that being careful around pedestrians should come naturally to most drivers, if nothing else because they'd want other drivers to be careful around them as pedestrians also.

Re: Oslo had 0 pedestrian, 0 cyclist, 0 children and 1 driver trafic deaths in 2019

#225

Post by chapium »

scotty79 wrote: post #124
oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that was the point they were making. They were saying that, here in the UK, if the light is green for you as a pedestrian, there is a guarantee - legally enforceable - that traffic cannot cross your path. Unlike in, say, many other European cities and - ime - ny city.

Worst thing for pedestrians and cyclist is "turn right on red" rule. If you want to turn right (in right handed flow) you can enter intersection on red (in Poland when additional green right arrow is lit up) but you have to yield to everybody, also pedestrians (that have green at the time). In theory you are required to stop before you enter on red but most drivers don't and some don't even slow down more than is phy…

Right on green is pretty brutal as well. A cyclist is going to keep moving forward and completely depends on the visibility of the drivers turn signal, assuming they decide to use it.

Re: Oslo had 0 pedestrian, 0 cyclist, 0 children and 1 driver trafic deaths in 2019

#226

Post by doktrin »

You can always tell which pedrstrians in Oslo are visitors, because they wait for cars to slow down at crosswalks before setting foot in the street. Norwegians are so accustomed to motorists being attentive that they blindly and confidently stroll into traffic (at crosswalks).

Re: Oslo had 0 pedestrian, 0 cyclist, 0 children and 1 driver trafic deaths in 2019

#227

Post by OGWhales »

yason wrote: post #80
gokhan wrote: post #13

One interesting observation on Oslo is that, pedestrians do cross the street when it's red for them, if there's no moving traffic close by. This is totally different from, for example, Copenhagen, Stockholm and places I visited in Germany. They're like Italians of the north. That's probably why we felt at home on the streets during our stay there, as a family from Turkey. I would love to have that 0 deaths statistics…

pedestrians do cross the street when it's red for them You have to think what pedestrian lights are for. They exist solely to improve the flow of car traffic. Pedestrian lights are in gross contrast to the rights and benefits of pedestrians. Without lights, pedestrians would always have first priority on a crosswalk. Cars would have to stop for any pedestrian crossing the street. However, drivers (of inefficient but…

Here is an interesting article on how automobile manufacturers helped to make jaywalking a crime in order to quell the concerns of automobile deaths and shift the responsibility onto the pedestrians in order to make automobiles more appealing:

https://www.vox.com/2015/1/15/7551873/jaywalking-history

Re: Oslo had 0 pedestrian, 0 cyclist, 0 children and 1 driver trafic deaths in 2019

#228

Post by ehnto »

wozniacki wrote: post #174
ehnto wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's so dangerous, maybe we should get the cars out of the places where people are walking around a lot. Since the primary purpose of a city is for people to get business and life done, and not to move cars from one side of it to the other. People should be able to cross outside of crosswalks, because the cars should be driving fast somewhere else, or driving at a safe speed in the city. That safe speed is far, fa…

If it's so dangerous, maybe we should get the cars out of the places where people are walking around a lot. Since the primary purpose of a city is for people to get business and life done, and not to move cars from one side of it to the other. This is why level-headed observers dismiss opinions on HN to be thoroughly foolhardy, tone-deaf and impractical. People use cars for a variety of reasons - convenience just bei…

I realize I created a dichotomy in my first post, the issue is more nuanced than that of course, removing cars entirely would never by my solution.

My reasoning to de-prioritize cars is simply that cars protect only some individuals at a high cost to everyone else in the city. They do it without solving the underlying issues, in some cases making them worse.

For most cities, focusing on cars takes resources (space/time/money) from systems that would otherwise help everyone in the city, like public transport and better amenities. Things like wider shared walking/biking paths, better lighting, safer public toilets and public spaces.

Cars create enormous amounts of noise, pollution and danger, and take up square miles of real estate, while getting in the way of everyone else. There's often dozens to hundreds of people waiting in the weather for just a handful of cars at one intersection alone. I forget how many times me and 20 others have to spend 10 minutes standing in the 40c heat waiting for five cars to muddle their way over the road.

The kicker is it doesn't even work that well, most cities with heavy car traffic are highly congested. Filling the space with pollution, noise and generally getting in the way while they barely achieve their own goals. Then when it's not so busy, the pedestrians are waiting for nothing. The car infrastructure itself is what's in the way. Increasing walking times, distances and exposure to the elements for everyone.

Not everyone can afford a car based metro commute either, parking alone can be prohibitively expensive. By focusing on cars, you're also creating a very tangible gap between those who get to enjoy the luxury of their car and those who have to stand in the sun/rain/snow/danger/noise and suffer. If you focused on making a better city instead of better roads, you could make it better for everyone.

Re: Oslo had 0 pedestrian, 0 cyclist, 0 children and 1 driver trafic deaths in 2019

#230

Post by jeromegv »

glofish wrote: post #214
TomMarius wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I live next to a subway and tram stations (trams have dedicated tracks not shared with car in most places here) and the car is still a better option, it's an issue with the public transport system and people driving do not make it much worse. The subway is not affected at all and yet the number of trains per hour has stayed constant for years.

What is your point exactly? That it is possible that there a few individuals for whom driving is more advantageous than public transport? Of course, it is possible. Is it likely that if everyone drove instead of taking public transport driving would become unbearable for everyone, you included? Of course again. So what are you arguing for exactly? That everyone should drive? Are you looking for absolution for liking…

I don’t exactly understand the point either. Public transit is clearly more efficient when you look at it from a system perspective. A subway can carry 30000/person per hour and a car lane full of cars at 1.2 person/car isn’t anywhere close from those numbers. What is there to argue really? I’m sure you can get door to door faster in a car when you have an empty road and follow a path that doesn’t exist on public transit but you can’t argue that if everyone was driving that it would scale in any kind of way better. Car lanes are just not carrying the same amount of passengers on top of requiring a parking space on both end (which is highly expensive real estate in any larger city)
Post reply on HN