This has just reaffirmed my fear of east-coasters.
You probably said this in jest, but if you look at a map of US population density, it is nearly identical.
US Road Fatalities 2001-09 mapped with OpenStreetMap
11–20 of 104 posts
Re: US Road Fatalities 2001-09 mapped with OpenStreetMap
#12This has just reaffirmed my fear of east-coasters.
More so east-coast roads. It seems to me like the west coast has more traffic-calming devices (though my experience there is limited to two weeks of bicycling in Seattle and Portland). Our idea of "traffic calming" on the east coast is to add strobe lights to traffic signals.
I dunno, east-coasters seem to have more road rage too. When you get to New York, people are completely and utterly pissed at eachother. Every time I go to Chicago, I notice that drivers all seem to have this underlying urge to kill all pedestrians which we don't get in California.
Re: US Road Fatalities 2001-09 mapped with OpenStreetMap
#13I think a per-person version of this chart would be interesting as well, dividing the map into regions, counting the number of accidents, and dividing it by the number of people in the region. Placement of accidents is less interesting than chance you will have an accident if you live there IMO. Still cool though :)
East coast: death, west coast: not so death
Re: US Road Fatalities 2001-09 mapped with OpenStreetMap
#14This has just reaffirmed my fear of east-coasters.
You probably said this in jest, but if you look at a map of US population density, it is nearly identical.
Well, it was mostly in jest, yes, but I think it's more than just that, I think it's also that here on the west coast we tend to drive a lot better than people in New York ;)
Re: US Road Fatalities 2001-09 mapped with OpenStreetMap
#15Great chart and SF downtown has a denser deep blue color; always suspected that is a more risky place for pedestrian.
Re: US Road Fatalities 2001-09 mapped with OpenStreetMap
#16Great chart and SF downtown has a denser deep blue color; always suspected that is a more risky place for pedestrian.
If you think SF is bad, look at Manhattan.
What's with all the 99 year old deaths in NYC? Bad data?
Re: US Road Fatalities 2001-09 mapped with OpenStreetMap
#17I think a per-person version of this chart would be interesting as well, dividing the map into regions, counting the number of accidents, and dividing it by the number of people in the region. Placement of accidents is less interesting than chance you will have an accident if you live there IMO. Still cool though :)
East coast: death, west coast: not so death
Most population graphs of the USA look like this in general.
Re: US Road Fatalities 2001-09 mapped with OpenStreetMap
#18Great chart and SF downtown has a denser deep blue color; always suspected that is a more risky place for pedestrian.
If you think SF is bad, look at Manhattan. What's with all the 99 year old deaths in NYC? Bad data?
I dunno, Manhattan is sloooooooow-moving, I'm not sure how you can fatally injure somebody at 5MPH gridlock!
Re: US Road Fatalities 2001-09 mapped with OpenStreetMap
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
You probably said this in jest, but if you look at a map of US population density, it is nearly identical.
Well, it was mostly in jest, yes, but I think it's more than just that, I think it's also that here on the west coast we tend to drive a lot better than people in New York ;)
Unless there's a drop of rain on the road, then all bets are off and everyone drives 80 miles an hour less than the speed limit.
Re: US Road Fatalities 2001-09 mapped with OpenStreetMap
#20I think a per-person version of this chart would be interesting as well, dividing the map into regions, counting the number of accidents, and dividing it by the number of people in the region. Placement of accidents is less interesting than chance you will have an accident if you live there IMO. Still cool though :)
East coast: death, west coast: not so death
Where there are more people, there are more accidents.
It'd be interesting to see it corrected for population.