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

831–840 of 1001 posts

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#831

Post by [deleted] »

vel0city wrote: post #411
scrumbledober wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

[deleted]

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#832

Post by InCityDreams »

mywittyname wrote: post #105

"We" don't ignore them. Every major government has a body dedicated entirely to automobile safety. In the USA, this is NHSTA - National Highway Safety & Transportation Administration. They maintain an information system of traffic fatality statistics in the USA, called FARS (fatality analysis reporting system). This system is used to determine new safety devices and standards for vehicles and to test their effectiven…

...they could reduce/ angle better the frontal areas of a lot of "cars". This morning a Ram driver came closer than having seen me would surmise - my helmet-protected head was just above the person's bonnet/ hood. I tried calculating the damage if they'd've hit me and it wasn't pretty: everywhere on my right side damaged/ struck except my ankels and feet.

not to mention the whole front end parking over any pavements.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#833

Post by Aeolun »

sandworm101 wrote: post #791
Doxin wrote: post #788

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

We can finally throw ‘think of the children’ back at them then.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#834

Post by martinmunk »

MichaelCollins wrote: post #625
dcsommer wrote: post #594

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US has this concept of "black spots" too. However, they are ironically named "safety corridors." We get a nice sign [0] to mark the death zone and then traffic continues unabated. [0] https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2010/04/inflated_traffic...

We also mark deadly intersections and turns with white crosses, one for each person who's died there. They're worth paying attention to, and I think locals at least learn to be weary of those locations.

I've been told by driving instructors that the rule of thumb for putting up octagon STOP signs here in Denmark is only when a serious accident has occurred.

I can't find a source for it, but they are definitely rarer than most other places, and I feel like they are taken more serious because of it.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#835

Post by panick21_ »

mywittyname wrote: post #105

"We" don't ignore them. Every major government has a body dedicated entirely to automobile safety. In the USA, this is NHSTA - National Highway Safety & Transportation Administration. They maintain an information system of traffic fatality statistics in the USA, called FARS (fatality analysis reporting system). This system is used to determine new safety devices and standards for vehicles and to test their effectiven…

As Elon Musk often says. You have to ask the right question to find the right answers.

If you ask the wrong questions and the optimize to fix the answers to those questions then there is not necessary an improvement.

Car designs is just one aspect of overall road network safety.

And of course even there, the US is also often holding safety back. For example advanced tracking headlights are still illegal for example. And other backwards regulations.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#836

Post by dm319 »

CapitalistCartr wrote: post #44

My kid sister died in a car accident two weeks ago. Now I find the numbers unfathomable. How can 40,000 families be suffering like this, every year?

I'm so sorry to hear that. Hope you and the family are ok or as ok as you can be. The numbers are unfathomable and unacceptable.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#837

Post by mmarquezs »

pabs3 wrote: post #716
hibikir wrote: post #569

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't have to be like this though: Other countries pay attention to crashes, especially with fatalities. One of my uncles was a civil engineer working in Spain's government, now retired. All crashes reported to the police would be marked in maps, with an extra layer for fatalities. Then they'd be grouped by the kilometer of road, to look for the sections of road that were the most dangerous. The worst locations…

I wonder if this data feeds direct to drivers too via their smartphone navigation apps. "Danger zone ahead, please consider slowing down".

I am from Spain and I don't think so... but maybe you can have it in some app. In any case there are road sign indicating it.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#838

Post by MoreSEMI »

quantum_magpie wrote: post #770
bsder wrote: post #568

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is all this true for modern UV LEDs?

You need UV-C for sterilization and there are no LEDs emitting that.

This is no longer true. Vishay and Nichia[1] for example, produce leds in the UVC range.

[1]https://led-ld.nichia.co.jp/en/product/uv_uvc.html

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#839

Post by teakettle42 »

Thorrez wrote: post #829
teakettle42 wrote: post #808

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you could systematically reduce the speed on all urban/suburban streets to no more than 20 mph (actual driving speed, not posted limit), it would be a huge safety win for humans living in those places. What evidence is there that the attrition we see from car accidents is actually a net-loss for society? Furthermore, is safety the highest priority, or is it balanced with other concerns, including road efficiency…

>What evidence is there that the attrition we see from car accidents is actually a net-loss for society? What does "attrition" mean? People killed in car crashes? How could that not be a net loss? Your second sentence says "furthermore" to introduce the idea of the cost of safety measures, so that seems to imply the first sentence isn't considering the cost of safety measures.

> What does "attrition" mean? People killed in car crashes?

Yes

> How could that not be a net loss?

Is every human a net-positive to society? Obviously an objective measure is impossible to establish, but I doubt everyone is a net-gain.

How random are car-related deaths? Is this actually a problem?

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#840

Post by kortilla »

epistasis wrote: post #704
partdavid wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Not doing what I think should be done for my particular interest and priorities" isn't the same as "Ignoring." At all. By all means, continue to advocate, but the idea that "we" ignore car crashes is risible.

Nearly any actual that would result in fewer deaths is so far outside the Overton window. Claiming that there are ineffective government agencies that pay attention to a few tiny aspects of safety but ignore the vast majority of them-better city designs-, is not a thug except window dressing to enable the neglect of these deaths. You might find it risible to suggest that we are ignoring car deaths, but given the rise…

Have you heard of backup cameras? They are now mandatory on cars and significantly reduce the frequency of hitting pedestrians.

This negates both your point about anything reducing deaths being outside of the Overton window and your point about pedestrians not being considered.

Post reply on HN