Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes • Hacker News Board

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#201

Post by nextstepguy » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 8:33 PM UTC

jiveturkey wrote: post #174

CodeAndCuffs wrote: post #155

I was a cop for several years. I worked hundreds of crashes, and a few fatalities. If cars had a max speed limit of 85 mph, and required the seatbelt to be engaged to work, we'd cut our fatality rate in half. Most nations' DUI laws consider a 0.05 BAC as illegal. In most US states 0.08 is presumed under the influence, 0.06 - 0.079 is considered no presumption either way, and under .06 is considered not under the infl…

Who cares if you kill yourself through your own negligence? There shouldn't be a fine at all for seatbelts. DUI, OTOH, should be treated even more harshly than it is.

Because if you don't kill yourself, insurance will care footing the bill to send you to the hospital. Maybe insurances shouldn't cover people without seatbelts and have the ambulance let them be injured at the scene.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#202

Post by fumeux_fume » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 8:34 PM UTC

jiveturkey wrote: post #174

CodeAndCuffs wrote: post #155

I was a cop for several years. I worked hundreds of crashes, and a few fatalities. If cars had a max speed limit of 85 mph, and required the seatbelt to be engaged to work, we'd cut our fatality rate in half. Most nations' DUI laws consider a 0.05 BAC as illegal. In most US states 0.08 is presumed under the influence, 0.06 - 0.079 is considered no presumption either way, and under .06 is considered not under the infl…

Who cares if you kill yourself through your own negligence? There shouldn't be a fine at all for seatbelts. DUI, OTOH, should be treated even more harshly than it is.

Believe it or not, cleaning dead bodies off the road everyday has a cost.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#203

Post by dannylandau » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 8:35 PM UTC

I had two friends that were killed in a car crash inside city limits. One guy was turning left, and the other guy going 90 miles an hour in a 40 mile zone. Happened around midnight. Hit them perpendicular, and killed two friends and critically injured driver who survived and is recovering.

Have become much more sensitive about car crashes and speeding as a result obviously. Forces you to re-assess your life.

Realistic solution - Install speeding cameras everywhere, and most intersections. And levy heavy fines if a person is speeding 20 miles above speed limit, possibly even revoking driver's license in that case.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#204

Post by woodruffw » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 8:35 PM UTC

digdugdirk wrote: post #86

woodruffw wrote: post #2

This is a really excellent read, and neatly summarizes a thought that flashes through the back of my mind whenever someone tells me that public transit is unsafe. If over 100 people died each day on public transit, we'd have banned it by now. But we accept it in our automotive culture, while simultaneously handwringing over every incident that happens on public transit.

I find many of the issues brought up about public transit being unsafe revolve around the people you might encounter on public transit (drug users, homeless, mental illness, etc.) and the waiting around/walking to public transit stops (muggings, thefts, etc.) I've never had any issues myself, but have absolutely been exposed to those issues while taking transit. I've also witnessed those issues increase during/post l…

Right: public transport puts you in media res, exposing you to the other people around you. That's overwhelmingly average folks trying to go between work, home, and errands, but it's also the occasional disturbed person.

I will not deny that you'll find all kinds of antisocial behavior on public transit. What I'll say is this: that it's fundamentally a civic issue and not a public transit issue, and that even with all that behavior we still see nowhere near the amount of death and disfigurement that people experience on America's roads on a daily basis.

To make it pithy: we incorrectly prioritize the feeling of environmental safety over statistical safety. The reality is that the inebriated homeless guy on the subway is much less likely to harm you or take your life than the inebriated driver in the next lane.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#205

Post by bcrosby95 » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 8:36 PM UTC

Aunche wrote: post #176

digdugdirk wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find many of the issues brought up about public transit being unsafe revolve around the people you might encounter on public transit (drug users, homeless, mental illness, etc.) and the waiting around/walking to public transit stops (muggings, thefts, etc.) I've never had any issues myself, but have absolutely been exposed to those issues while taking transit. I've also witnessed those issues increase during/post l…

There are plenty of crazy, dangerous people on the road too. Psychologically, you feel more separated than them, even if they may be statistically be more dangerous.

I definitely feel safer on public transit. I live in an upper class neighborhood and I'm not sure if there's much more dangerous in this world than an entitled, distracted, moderately wealthy person driving an SUV that has places to go.

I leave the actual wealthy out of this because they just pay someone else to drive.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#206

Post by wizofaus » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 8:36 PM UTC

jiveturkey wrote: post #174

CodeAndCuffs wrote: post #155

I was a cop for several years. I worked hundreds of crashes, and a few fatalities. If cars had a max speed limit of 85 mph, and required the seatbelt to be engaged to work, we'd cut our fatality rate in half. Most nations' DUI laws consider a 0.05 BAC as illegal. In most US states 0.08 is presumed under the influence, 0.06 - 0.079 is considered no presumption either way, and under .06 is considered not under the infl…

Who cares if you kill yourself through your own negligence? There shouldn't be a fine at all for seatbelts. DUI, OTOH, should be treated even more harshly than it is.

Aside from the fact your own death is always going to impose a cost on society, I'd assume having a seatbelt on as a driver significantly increases your ability to maintain at least some control of a vehicle in a collision, reducing your chance of injuring others (both in and outside said vehicle).

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#207

Post by willcipriano » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 8:36 PM UTC

xyzzyz wrote: post #114

willcipriano wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of riding a motorbike (cycle here) is also driving defensively is it not? I don't assume people are going to stop at a given intersection, I take a look at their current speed and project it forward before determining if it's safe for me to go. If someone is going at a high rate of speed towards a stop sign or red light, I don't pull out just because I have the "right of way" I assume they are going to do someth…

> I don't assume people are going to stop at a given intersection, I take a look at their current speed and project it forward before determining if it's safe for me to go. While I sympathize with your overall sentiment (and indeed, as a fellow motorcyclists, I know a lot about defensive driving/riding), I have never seen people consistently drive the way you describe, ever. For many intersections in the cities (prob…

First I must say, in the city I'll park my car at the outskirts and take public transit so I admit it's situational. I don't like driving with so many unpredictable pedestrians running around, you could end up in prison because someone had a few too many drinks and fell into the road.

But in your example I'd have a good chance to prevent a collision. I'd already have my foot on the brake due to the crosswalk there. I will have brought my speed down that I will be able to stop should someone suddenly appear within it. A kid could pop out from between those two cars on the right chasing a ball, so you need to have a stopping distance of perhaps 2 - 3 feet maximum, depending what vehicle of mine I am driving that's probably 20 - 25 mph maximum. 25 mph is the speed limit there so I probably wouldn't even get tailgaters at that speed, but I don't care if I do. That intersection is a good place for a rolling stop, where you bring the car down to perhaps 5mph before you proceed, mostly because of the sidewalks on both sides and the risk of kids running around or riding bikes. That's a residential street, there should be no need to move quickly down it.

In addition to all that my car has a top of line collision avoidance system, side curtain airbags, a high crash rating, etc. I always wear my seatbelt and keep my kid strapped in with a age appropriate booster seat.

I'm not saying I'm perfect but being careful can reduce your personal risk considerably.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#208

Post by dahart » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 8:37 PM UTC

googlryas wrote: post #75

hgomersall wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is, every driver you interact with might be drunk or distracted. In a collision with a drunk in a car, I'd rather be in a bus.

Sure, but you would probably rather be driving a car if your bus driver was suicidal that morning.

This goes straight to the article’s point that we tend to care about things that don’t actually matter as much when they seem worse. The hypothetical bus driver suicide seems bad if he takes out other people with him, it’s easy to imagine being a passenger with no control and meeting a terrifying doom. Let’s just nevermind that it almost never happens, and forget that suicide car drivers is a much, much more likely occurrence in the real world. And bad drivers accidentally taking out people near them happens way more often than anything to do with suicides. You’re far less likely to be killed on a bus than in a car, hands down. Wanting to drive a car instead simply highlights our flawed emotional thinking.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#209

Post by rustybelt » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 8:37 PM UTC

tshaddox wrote: post #66

TylerE wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is control . While a careful, attentive driver in a well-maintained vehicle certainly isn’t immune, their risk is much lower than someone who drives tired, drunk, or high in a car with bald tires and bad brakes.

I'd love to see studies that attempt to control for attributes related to "driver skill" or "driver responsibility" that you could objectively test yourself on, so that you could more accurately predict your own risk and compare it against the risk of alternatives like public transit. It's not really good enough to say "I don't drive drunk, and I'm pretty sure I'm a more skilled driver than average, therefore I can d…

I don't think you can completely discard all comparisons, but people are intuitively right to recognize that if they don't engage in risky behavior (like drunk driving) they're less at risk of being in an accident. To argue otherwise is basically saying driving drunk is no more risky than driving sober.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#210

Post by woodruffw » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 8:38 PM UTC

aidenn0 wrote: post #161

digdugdirk wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find many of the issues brought up about public transit being unsafe revolve around the people you might encounter on public transit (drug users, homeless, mental illness, etc.) and the waiting around/walking to public transit stops (muggings, thefts, etc.) I've never had any issues myself, but have absolutely been exposed to those issues while taking transit. I've also witnessed those issues increase during/post l…

IMO there's only really 2 underlying issues people have with public transit: 1. In nearly all of the US (maybe everywhere except parts of NYC?) it is a worse experience than driving (requires planning, takes longer, can't carry more than one or two bags with you). 2. It is déclassé. I think #2 is at least partly a result of #1. Also note that #1 is true even for most cities in the US, because cities in the US are unb…

> I think #2 is at least partly a result of #1

And vice versa. As I said in a thread yesterday[1]: we justify our continuing neglect of public transit by claiming that "polite society" avoids it, which in turn fulfills the prophecy.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32165783