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

901–910 of 1001 posts

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#901

Post by bluGill »

hibikir wrote: post #569
flaque wrote: post #96

There’s an audio version of the same point here: https://podcast.strongtowns.org/e/the-drip-drip-drip-of-traf... A ”best effort” summary of this article: if thousands of people die in once place, it’s one of the great tragedies in American history. However if thousands of people die in thousands different places, it is ignored and considered a fact of life. When a plane or train crashes, we stop everything and redesi…

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…

The US has those lists already. There is plenty of data, and once in a while something useful is done about one of the worst places.

What is lacking is any learning. Despite widespread knowledge of what is wrong nobody does anything about it for the future. We keep designing new roads with all the known bad features. We keep allowing people to get and keep their drivers license with minimal training. I'm sure traffic engineers who study this stuff have a better list than me, but the above two (or variations thereof) will be near the top of theirs. So long as we don't act on what we already know nothing will change.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#902

Post by ATsch »

rootusrootus wrote: post #463
unsupp0rted wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People shouldn't really drive 300 miles in individual private vehicles. Apart from the chance of accidentally killing oneself or others, it's hugely inefficient. If we changed an interstate full of cars to high speed trains (or hyperloop or whatever) which depart every half hour, it'd be safer, cheaper, cleaner... you name it.

So what should I do? Take a train? Doesn't go there. Bus? Again. Fly? That's not more efficient. Maybe grandma just doesn't need a visit from her grandkids. Instead, I bought an electric car. I bet it compares quite favorably to a typical bus. And grandma does like to see her grandkids, let me tell ya.

> Take a train? Doesn't go there.

It should, that's the point. The only reason it doesn't is because the US has been regressing on rail infrastructure for a century.

> Bus? Again.

It should. And it should be so often you don't need to check a schedule.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#903

Post by AndrewThrowaway »

Nition wrote: post #478
staticautomatic wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally those things are helpful but I think China has pretty well demonstrated that there’s no alternative universe where fully locking everything down eliminates Covid.

It worked for us in New Zealand. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ When we tried the same thing a second time it didn't work, but that was due to people not following the rules.

It worked the same as it worked on personal level too. At the very beginning you can just lock yourself inside and there is basically no chance to get sick. But what then?

If you could just lock everybody in the world for a month you could basically get rid of all the infectious diseases. However you can't. So lock down only helps to win time.

After you win your time you really need to know what to do with it - e.g. effective vaccine is created in this time.

Otherwise you just delay inevitable and that is it.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#904

Post by ladyattis »

ArrayBoundCheck wrote: post #475
ladyattis wrote: post #194

It reminds me of how here in the US we often overuse signage and other markings on roads to 'prevent' accidents but roads with less markings that are obvious and direct tend to have less accidents by comparison. I wonder if part of the problem with American roads is the fact we assume people need information they don't need or use. I know that roads here aren't actively calmed by changing the quality of the road (rou…

A couple years ago I saw a video of a guy filming himself talking to a road maintenance worker. In an angry tone he said they didn't have enough pylons and noone can see them when they drive uphill and they're causing accidents. The worker said policy says to use 3 (or 5 or something) pylons. As the worker was saying it you can hear someone slamming on their breaks. The guy turning his camera and catches a guy who sw…

Nice video. Yeah, that scenario is really bad. And it really shows how some roads aren't well designed or people aren't good at setting up buffers/warning zones to get people to slow down.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#905

Post by emarsden »

flaque wrote: post #96

There’s an audio version of the same point here: https://podcast.strongtowns.org/e/the-drip-drip-drip-of-traf... A ”best effort” summary of this article: if thousands of people die in once place, it’s one of the great tragedies in American history. However if thousands of people die in thousands different places, it is ignored and considered a fact of life. When a plane or train crashes, we stop everything and redesi…

> A ”best effort” summary of this article: if thousands of people die in once place, it’s one of the great tragedies in American history. However if thousands of people die in thousands different places, it is ignored and considered a fact of life.

In economics, this is called catastrophe aversion: as a society, do we prefer accidental deaths to be "clumped together" or not (the total number of people killed being equal). Though the question is very important in regulating certain industries that can produce major accidents, we don't really know much about social preferences in this regard (the limited studies undertaken so far suggest that Americans and Europeans do not want regulators to adopt catastrophe-averse policies for safety risks). For an approachable introduction to this question, see [1].

[1] https://www.foncsi.org/en/publications/collections/industria...

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#906

Post by bluGill »

vineyardmike wrote: post #546
briffle wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a few friends that think the stats I show them are a complete lie and fabrication, but the truth is: more people from pistols than 'assault rifles'. In fact, in the US, more people die from knives than rifles. (not just the 'assualt ones' Heck more people per year in the US die of 'hands, fists, and feet'. [0] But guess what is always in the news, and talked about by politicians on both sides, until their cons…

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…

You obviously have no idea what an assault rifle is, just made an assumption from the name.

An assault rifle is a normal rifle that because of a few cosmetic features looks like a military gun. None of those features make it more deadly than any other gun.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#907

Post by throwaway0a5e »

rufus_foreman wrote: post #663
flaque wrote: post #96

There’s an audio version of the same point here: https://podcast.strongtowns.org/e/the-drip-drip-drip-of-traf... A ”best effort” summary of this article: if thousands of people die in once place, it’s one of the great tragedies in American history. However if thousands of people die in thousands different places, it is ignored and considered a fact of life. When a plane or train crashes, we stop everything and redesi…

>> When a plane or train crashes, we stop everything and redesign the entire network to prevent this from happening again There was a train crash less than a month ago that killed 4 people and injured 150, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Missouri_train_derailment . It was at a crossing that didn't have warning lights or crossing gates. Which is a known issue and has been for many decades. We are not going to stop…

>We are not going to stop everything and redesign the entire rail network to prevent this from happening again, because it would cost too much.

The fact that we as a society have raised a few generations that cannot have adult discussions about "how much is too much" except in small groups, behind closed doors and off the record (and when such discussions leak the conclusions are always vilified no matter what they were) is going to hamper us for at least the next 70yr at least.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#908

Post by alaric410 »

BitwiseFool wrote: post #560
umvi wrote: post #185

I think there's another reason too we "ignore" car crashes: loose coupling with politics. Say a DUI driver kills a random family of 5. Is that going to make national headlines? Probably not. Very little to be gained politically. It doesn't really enrage us because we love and celebrate alcohol too much to be capable of villainizing it like guns. So as a result, it doesn't spread very far on social media. Now say a ra…

>"until the media decides either alcohol or cars are villains that need to be eradicated from society. " I feel like this is in the process of happening right now. The number of car-critical and car-hostile posts has been increasing and the sentiment is gaining traction on "the left" lately. What is strongtowns if not one such publication?

Being car critical is more than just a safety issue. I moved from the US to Germany and exchanged commuting by car to commuting by bicycle. The positive impact on my quality of life is impossible to put into mere words. It's huge.

Designing cities/towns where you don't need a car is one of the best things a society can do.

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#909

Post by tifik »

imgabe wrote: post #882
tifik wrote: post #825

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there’s very likely a net economic/social gain. I see your point, but I strongly disagree. Providing a suicidal person with the right resources to help them avoid suicide will (imo) yield a net gain over the rest of that persons life, as opposed to the gain from selling a gun and a bullet and giving him a quick out. One example that comes to might right away is Alan Turing. Whose contributions to modern society can…

Turing didn’t need help out of depression. He needed to NOT be persecuted, tortured, and mutilated by the state, furthering the point that people in power should not interfere with the rights of free people to go about their lives as they see fit as long as they aren’t hurting anyone else.

I agree, I didnt question the reason behind the suicide, I just wanted to point out that not all suicidal people can be labeled as burdens to society.

> Live as they see fit

So in your opinion that includes killing oneself, even in cases that could be avoided if access to appropriate help could be provided? (Not enforced, provided as an alternative option to suicide)

Re: Why we ignore thousands of daily car crashes

#910

Post by tifik »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #885
tifik wrote: post #825

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there’s very likely a net economic/social gain. I see your point, but I strongly disagree. Providing a suicidal person with the right resources to help them avoid suicide will (imo) yield a net gain over the rest of that persons life, as opposed to the gain from selling a gun and a bullet and giving him a quick out. One example that comes to might right away is Alan Turing. Whose contributions to modern society can…

Bringing up Turing to support the idea that the state should prevent people from taking their lives is beyond tone deaf. People asking the state to enforce their moral compass (which is basically what you're doing now) is what lead to the situation that Turing killed himself over.

> Providing a suicidal person with the right resources to help them avoid suicide

Where in this sentence do you read anything about enforcing anything?

Post reply on HN