Live data from Hacker News

Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

strongtowns.org

411–420 of 1001 posts

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ethics and justifications of military recruitment Putin's War shows what happens when you don't have a strong military.

it shows what happens when you don't have a strong military and try to invade a neighbor...

The invasion of Ukraine started in 2014, back when Ukraine had practically no military. Putin escalated this invasion due to the fact Ukraine had been building up its army in response to key parts of its country being occupied by a foreign invader.

If Ukraine had a large military in 2014, I very much doubt Putin would have invaded Crimea nor would there be Russian troops in the Donbas.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not wearing a seatbelt is an individual choice, and should not be a crime. P.S. Growing up, my dad had the dealer install seatbelts in the family wagon before he picked it up. We never moved an inch unless everyone was buckled up. Nobody else, and I mean nobody else, had seatbelts in their car at the time. P.P.S. Seatbelts also saved my life.

Graphic car safety ad about seatbelts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epTdI-9V6Jk

When I drive I don't move unless my passengers buckle up. When I'm the driver, it's my rules.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#413

Another factor is that people are more afraid of scary things when they feel like they can’t control them. Driving makes people feel like they are in control, which makes drivers underestimate their chances of crashing. This is the same reason that airplane crashes and autonomous vehicle crashes are also huge news events: if people feel like crashes are being caused by something they can’t control, that scares them.

I want to make clear that I agree completely, but I've been injured in two car crashes in my life. Once, I was a pedestrian and crossing the street in a crosswalk with a signal when an old lady drove into me and then drove off. We had made eye contact while I crossed, but for whatever reason she decided to start driving nonetheless. The other time, I was stopped at a red light and someone arguing with their partner r…

Yes, the feeling of control is an illusion.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#414
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. You could have just stopped at "control". That's the fundamental dynamic by which we can explain this differential public sentiment--a sense of control or lack thereof, independent of whether that control actually exist…

Yep. We don’t fear things under our control. Do I fear driving my car? No, because I can control my safety (to an extent, anyway). I can drive defensively. I can stay focused. I can avoid dangerous intersections. I wear a seat belt and have a big safe SUV. Mass shootings are terrifying because there’s no sense of control. Animals are scary (spiders, snakes) because we can’t control them. Disease is scary when we can’…

> Mass shootings are terrifying because there’s no sense of control.

For anyone here concerned about this, it doesn’t take very much money in HN-terms to become reasonably well trained. You can:

1) Carry your own weapon, following your state’s laws in all but a few. 2) Learn to use that weapon very well, but more importantly: 3) Learn to use cover and move defensively or offensively 4) Learn to administer basic medical attention to yourself and others 5) Learn to read people and know when something might be about to happen.

After enough training, you will at least probably not freeze in an active shooter scenario. Even if you’re not into carrying your own weapon, doing some training will teach you how insanely hard it is to hit any moving target (or anything at all when the adrenaline is going).

Re. 5), many people in my state carry and I never used to notice them. Now I can pick out who is and isn’t, and usually how long they’ve been doing it (newbies will subtly check their weapon is secure every time they move).

The Secret Service is trained the same way; someone not used to carrying who is about to do something bad will send off all kinds of weird body language signals.

——

No, you don’t need to learn this because shootings are exceedingly rare. But if you’re nervous, learning these things will give you a sense of understanding about the threat, and the basic tools to do something to keep your loved ones safe in that one-in-a-hundred-thousand-lifetimes event.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

>This maximum would barely change your time to destination Yes it would. The drive from LA to San Francisco is about 300 miles on Interstate 5. Much of this highway is completely straight, with excellent visibility through an unpopulated desert. When sparsely trafficked (as it is much of the time), it is safe to drive 80+ MPH on I5 for hours at a time. At 80 MPH, this is a 3 hour 45 minute drive. At your proposed 60…

Gonna go ahead and say the unthinkable here... so what? The person driving fast endangers themselves and everyone else around them. In what other area of society do we tolerate extremely dangerous behavior (40,000+ deaths a year) because to not would be an inconvenience? Guns, I suppose. But I'm not a huge fan or our polices around those either.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Well done, you've specified a superset of self driiving without delivering any economic benefit. Oh, and every road in Europe is now a hazard because you've designed new cars with absurdly low speed limits. But no I'm sure your baselesss opinion on speeds is best.

Europe is now mandating intelligent speed limiters, so I don't know what you are getting on about.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#417
post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, those solutions don't really work because of the contagiousness, so they are going out of favor. What is needed is effective prophylactics (beyond mRNA vaccines) and effective treatment. But the effort spent on that is, sadly, minimal.

Exactly. For example, how many buildings have UV sterilized return air, now? A tiny, tiny fraction. And this would benefit us for way more than just Covid.

Honestly, I don't think UV return air would work as well as you think. The real solution is increased ventilation rates.

UV bulbs are expensive (and invisible unless you get to poke around a buildings mechanical room.), they need to be replaced typically ~annually (they won't be). If they get dust on them, they don't work as well. Etc. etc.

And here's the issue: To actually deal with high concentration infectious aerosols you need to get that air out of the room ASAP. (i.e. negative pressure rooms) If you can sterilize the return air that's great, but frankly I suspect dilution and air movement is going to be the dominant effect in reducing infection chains.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#418

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…

> 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.

Yep I believe that is a pretty well established cognitive bias called Illusion of Control [1]. Going down the rabbit hole of cognitive biases is a fascinating journey, and lot of them are relevant when driving a car.

One I found especially interesting is specifically about how improving safety features may not reduce accidents as much as it could, because when people feel safer, they tend to take greater risks [2]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusion_of_control

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation#Peltzman_eff...

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no doubt that the belt played a role in reducing your injuries.

But you'd then argue being able to keep your foot on the brake doesn't help your chances of avoiding causing injury/death to others?

If you're hit from the side, you were already traveling forward.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

>This maximum would barely change your time to destination Yes it would. The drive from LA to San Francisco is about 300 miles on Interstate 5. Much of this highway is completely straight, with excellent visibility through an unpopulated desert. When sparsely trafficked (as it is much of the time), it is safe to drive 80+ MPH on I5 for hours at a time. At 80 MPH, this is a 3 hour 45 minute drive. At your proposed 60…

> How many lives do you think would be saved by capping speeds to 60 MPH on I5? If alcohol or distracted driving are not factors, I would say probably close to zero.

Amazing how you'd think it's actually close to zero. So many dangerous situations are removed once speeding is at least attempted to be removed from the equation.

To name two: reaction times are increased, stopping distances are reduced. I probably know what you'd say next: the driver is distracted. Not the speed's problem. To which I'll say, yeah of course the driver's distracted -- it's because the driver's human and will never be paying attention to the road 100% at all times.

IMO driving speeds, and how a community feels about it, are huge indicators on how hostile and how selfish a community can be.

Post reply on HN