Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

Post by WalterBright » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 9:34 PM UTC

lovich wrote: post #266

WalterBright wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have a right to be stupid, even if it results in your death. > 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 Not a chance. The g forces are tremendous, and you're just along for the ride in a collision. In my major accident, I had a lap belt on, but my arms and legs and torso flung about totally out of my control.

> You have a right to be stupid, even if it results in your death. Do you? I’ve not seen hide nor hair of that right defined anywhere.

Post by lupire » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 9:34 PM UTC

namesbc wrote: post #314

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…

Cars should have a regulator installed by the manufacturer to limit speed to 20mph on roads with people, and to 60mph on grade separated highways. This maximum would barely change your time to destination, but it would save thousands of lives per year. - 20mph: 90% survival rate - 30mph: 60% survival rate - 40mph: 20% survival rate https://www.betterstreetschicago.org/blog/chicago-speed-came...

Post by wizofaus » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 9:36 PM UTC

goatcode wrote: post #292

wizofaus wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say we generally do exactly that, when the threshold is significant enough and it's a behavior that has no beneficial/ safe level (we tax and restrict cigarettes heavily, but not so much overconsumption of food etc. Arguably we should/could have penalties for failing to get enough exercise, though there are almost certainly better ways to reduce dangerously sedentary lifestyles).

>Arguably we should/could have penalties for failing to get enough exercise, though there are almost certainly better ways to reduce dangerously sedentary lifestyles This is my point: we pick and choose, and we're subject to the whims of society, when it comes to what we deem unacceptable. Citing a collective norm that potentially could have been influenced by societal ebbs and flows is not an objective argument, eve…

Post by WalterBright » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 9:37 PM UTC

lttlrck wrote: post #293

WalterBright wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have a right to be stupid, even if it results in your death. > 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 Not a chance. The g forces are tremendous, and you're just along for the ride in a collision. In my major accident, I had a lap belt on, but my arms and legs and torso flung about totally out of my control.

I just saw this on Reddit. The driver would most likely have regained control had he left his seatbelt on. SFW. https://reddit.com/r/IdiotsInCars/comments/w4kyx3/oy/

Post by lupire » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 9:37 PM UTC

ajmurmann wrote: post #355

admax88qqq wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Something like 80% of fatal crashes involve either alcohol, no seatbelt, or excessive speed This is the crux of the issue on why we as a society ignore car crashes and panic about train/plane crashes. I'd wager it mostly comes down to filtering out things we feel we have control over stressing about those we don't.

I think you are definitely on to something here. For the alcohol and speeding I wonder how many of the fatalities are people other than the person speeding or drunk. I am not even thinking about passengers, but people in other cars, bicyclists or pedestrians.