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

Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

strongtowns.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

791–800 of 1001 posts

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#791

Post by sandworm101 »

Doxin wrote: post #788
MichaelCollins wrote: post #773

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes there isn't much you can do. One I grew up near is a T intersection, between three farm fields. The road that butts into the other crests a hill, and the other road is right behind the crest of that hill, about 20-30 meters. There is a T intersection sign on the hill before you reach the top, but some people didn't see it or heed it. If you're following the speed limit with a dry road, it's probably safe ev…

Traffic calming measures is how you tackle things like that. Adding a sharpish S-curve to the roads approaching the T should remove enough speed to make it safer. Won't even need a sign.

A surprise chicane, without even a sign, on a road with a history of speeding cars. What could possibly go wrong?

This also seems to be farm country. Converting productive fields to non-productive traffic calming structures would be about as popular as banning pickup trucks.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#792

Post by afiori »

MichaelCollins wrote: post #773
lelandbatey wrote: post #746

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One would hope that such crosses instead prompt folks to change such intersections so that they will prompt fewer deaths. Maybe then we can have a rule: if we rebuild the road and we see a drop in deaths, then maybe we can remove the sign with crosses. Better yet, replace the intersection with a bus-only, bicycle-only, or rail as public transit, and then that set of crosses is permanently retired.

Sometimes there isn't much you can do. One I grew up near is a T intersection, between three farm fields. The road that butts into the other crests a hill, and the other road is right behind the crest of that hill, about 20-30 meters. There is a T intersection sign on the hill before you reach the top, but some people didn't see it or heed it. If you're following the speed limit with a dry road, it's probably safe ev…

The counterintuitive thing to do is to make roads "feel" unsafe to make them safe.

A example of this (here done for laugh) is [0], where a single lane muddy curvy hillside road has a speed limit of 80 km/h (50 mph).

The point I would like to make here is that on a street like this is it impossible to joyride and even with low visibility intersections the risk of a T-bone or a fatal crash is minuscule.

This particular example is a strawman of the problem: there are many reasons why most roads cannot be like this, it is just an example of "If the drivers have to pay attention they will pay attention"

[0] https://funsubstance.com/fun/294735/irish-speed-sign/

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#793

Post by sandworm101 »

diordiderot wrote: post #789
MichaelCollins wrote: post #773

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes there isn't much you can do. One I grew up near is a T intersection, between three farm fields. The road that butts into the other crests a hill, and the other road is right behind the crest of that hill, about 20-30 meters. There is a T intersection sign on the hill before you reach the top, but some people didn't see it or heed it. If you're following the speed limit with a dry road, it's probably safe ev…

Speedbumps are inexpensive and last a very long time.

In warm climates. Speedbumps are a problem in cold/rural areas that need continuous plowing in winter.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#794

Post by spacemanmatt »

moistly wrote: post #613
nradov wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no value in the Chinese approach. Protecting people from infectious disease can't possibly justify violating fundamental human rights, such as the right to free assembly?

Do you support the right of the polio-infected resident of Rockland County (a NYC suburb) to attend tonight’s basketball game? Would you be okay with him shopping at your grocery store, standing in line with you at the cash register?

Yeah, infectious disease beats free assembly every time.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#795

Post by notch656a »

tmnvix wrote: post #786
tzs wrote: post #737

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you talking about pedestrian deaths when you mention car risk for your children? If so, good news. Those have been going down. Since 1975 pedestrian deaths of under 13 year olds have steadily declined by more than an order of magnitude. For 13-19 year olds the decline hasn't been as big, but is still over a factor of 3 [1]. [1] https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/pedes...

Could be that the reduction has come at the cost of children's freedom of movement?

Yes, now that they have been locked indoors all day they are free of death by car! Sadly there is inexplicable epidemic of obesity, and obesity linked disease appearing in this children later in life, what could possibly be the contributors?

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#796

Post by watwut »

thrown_22 wrote: post #612
vineyardmike wrote: post #546

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The banning of assault rifles is because it’s easy and doesn’t detract from peoples lives at all. Assault rifles are for assault and we don’t need more assault. So why have them? Because a few people think it’s cool to own? Pistols and other Guns aren’t very effective at stopping deaths, but they’re perceived to be good defense, so banning them en mass is less palatable. NYC banned pistols once because it was often t…

>Assault rifles are for assault and we don’t need more assault. So why have them? Because a few people think it’s cool to own? People who think this should have a grizzly bear run at them at least once. Having seen it from a car I became pro-minigun instantly.

You claim people have assault rifles to shoot suddenly attacking grizzly bears? And keep shooting ready?

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#797

Post by montag »

theptip wrote: post #255

> It is widely recognized that there is an epidemic of suicides among current and former military personnel, especially those who have been on active duty in a combat theater... There were 3,481 combat deaths in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Since 9/11, there have been over 30,000 military suicides. Over 20 soldiers a day take their own lives. Pet peeve: while I really like the general point of the article, I wish the aut…

Another pet peeve: The effect of gun ownership on suicide rates goes totally ignored. Suicide accounts for 21k out of 33k annual gun deaths in the US[1]. If we're outraged by school shootings, we should be apoplectic about facilitating suicide.

[1] https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/gun-deaths/

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#798

Post by watwut »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #532
colpabar wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an extremely cynical american, my view is that we don't do anything because guns are a big industry in america, and industry controls our government in all the places that matter. But my point was more that we only ever talk about gun violence when a very specific type of gun violence occurs, and pointing out the incidents that constitute the bulk of the aggregate number usually gets you called a racist.

Which bulk of the aggregate number? The number 1 cause of gun deaths in the US is suicides.

He wants to talk about black on black crime. As opposed to white on white crime which is not talked about as separate issue. Because, most murder by large number are among people who know each other - are friends, family, do business. And those groups tend to have same race.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#799

Post by afiori »

vladvasiliu wrote: post #767
yreg wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, I wouldn't expect it to be reasonably possible to avoid that rule. More difficult than driving without a license anyway. I believe over here the traffic inspectorate would want the plates back if you stop paying the insurance and then if you drive without the plates that's an instant hefty fee from the first cop that sees you. (The insurance is tied to the car, not to the driver.)

> Interesting, I wouldn't expect it to be reasonably possible to avoid that rule. More difficult than driving without a license anyway. > if you drive without the plates that's an instant hefty fee from the first cop that sees you How so? Said cop would have to stop you and check you have insurance. In almost 18 years of driving in France, some of I which I would drive twice a day, I've only been stopped for a police…

There is a missing section in you quoted part

> I believe over here the traffic inspectorate would want the plates back if you stop paying the insurance

I guess the insurance/traffic inspectorate can mark your plate as stolen-like if you stop paying without giving it back

So either the first cop that sees you without a place or the first time your plate is checked by any automated system.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#800

Post by notch656a »

sooheon wrote: post #783
notch656a wrote: post #779

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If people start driving twice as much and die twice as much, I would not report the roads as being anymore dangerous.

I don't care if a meter of road is dangerous, I care if the amount of driving necessary to live in a city is likely to get me killed. Or if I'm liable to be killed while walking. Deaths/distance is a limited metric that has no bearing on societal cost. Deaths/value is the appropriate cost benefit analysis.

The amount of driving 'necessary' for commuting is zero. You can live in a homeless camp next to your job, or the postage-stamp sized studio most people could afford within walking distance of where the jobs are. You may get hassled by police every once in awhile, but then again seems safer than driving. Perhaps roll yourself in bubble wrap as well and wear a helmet while walking there. I can name quite a few cities where you can wake up in a heroin daze and shit in the streets and be within walking distance of someplace to earn some cash.

Personally 99.9% of driving I do is for pleasure, the lever I have to adjust is miles I drive not the miles the average person drives. On an individual level, each person can directly move their "miles I drive" lever but only barely move the "average miles a person drives" lever. Deaths/capita is a societal measurement that only has limited usefulness to the individual human, who is determining his own behavior. Deaths/mile is more useful as it actually allows me to examine how dangerous the roads are and plan how far I want to commute or pleasure drive accordingly.

Deaths / capita also allows the twisted viewpoint that someone driving a million miles for pleasure gives a very wrong view to the person driving a few miles for necessity. You claim to care about the amount of driving 'necessary' but then use a figure that includes deaths from people driving to the cinema or bar or a road trip to Vegas, which are not necessary. If you only include deaths per capita based on 'necessary' driving it would be a hell of a lot smaller, especially in comparison to the change in deaths per mile.

Post reply on HN