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

U.S. pedestrian deaths reach a 40-year high

text.npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

621–625 of 625 posts

Re: U.S. pedestrian deaths reach a 40-year high

#621

Post by AlwaysRock »

dennyabraham wrote: post #520
AlwaysRock wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah that is a weird one because no one is going to get ticketed for going the speed limit or 5 over in the passing/leftmost lane and technically they are doing nothing wrong. It just makes driving more difficult for everyone else. The rightmost lane is somewhat similar. You really shouldnt travel in it. It's for getting on and off the road. If you are in it you're making it harder for other to merge on/off the road.…

By rightmost lane, do you mean the on/offramp? Otherwise, it's legally required in much the country to stay in the right lane except when passing.

I meant 3 lane highways.

Re: U.S. pedestrian deaths reach a 40-year high

#622

Post by kube-system »

AlwaysRock wrote: post #620
kube-system wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The rightmost lane is somewhat similar. You really shouldnt travel in it. It's for getting on and off the road. If you are in it you're making it harder for other to merge on/off the road. But again you're not going to get a ticket for pulling into that right lane and staying as long as you'd like. I'm curious as to where this is the law. It was not in the state where I learned to drive.

It isnt law anywhere. That is my point. If you're traveling in the rightmost land on a three lane highway you are making it difficult for others to get on and off. The middle lane is where you should be.

I drive the speed limit. If I did that in the middle lane, people would be passing me on both sides. The right lane is for slower traffic. Lanes to the left are for passing. Merging is the responsibility of the drivers merging.

Re: U.S. pedestrian deaths reach a 40-year high

#623

Post by pastage »

dionidium wrote: post #503
pastage wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are really cherry picking to come to that conclusion, but if citations correlates that strongly to less accidents that should be easy to show. It can not be the only thing though.

Remember what we're trying to explain here: two distinct step-ups in pedestrian fatalities occurring in just one country. Any proposed explanation needs to address both 1) why it happened when it did; and 2) why it happened in only that one country. Cars are getting bigger everywhere and have been for decades, so that fails both tests. COVID only happened in 2020 and it happened everywhere, so that fails both tests.…

You are postfixing your post saying that this "evidence" is not enough to support you case on its own. My point is that it is even worse.

You miss everything that disproves your opinion. The graph does not support your argumentation at all, there is too much noise. You need to explain how citations affect accidents. We fired most of our traffic cops in the eighties here, the number of citations plumeted. The number of deaths are on a steady decline.

Re: U.S. pedestrian deaths reach a 40-year high

#624

Post by pastage »

barbariangrunge wrote: post #548
pastage wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anything designing a neighborhood with no sidewalks must be a systemic issue?

It's just one town. Doesn't necessarily apply to the other towns or cities nearby

It is very common if street view is anything to go on.

Re: U.S. pedestrian deaths reach a 40-year high

#625

Post by dionidium »

pastage wrote: post #623
dionidium wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remember what we're trying to explain here: two distinct step-ups in pedestrian fatalities occurring in just one country. Any proposed explanation needs to address both 1) why it happened when it did; and 2) why it happened in only that one country. Cars are getting bigger everywhere and have been for decades, so that fails both tests. COVID only happened in 2020 and it happened everywhere, so that fails both tests.…

You are postfixing your post saying that this "evidence" is not enough to support you case on its own. My point is that it is even worse. You miss everything that disproves your opinion. The graph does not support your argumentation at all, there is too much noise. You need to explain how citations affect accidents. We fired most of our traffic cops in the eighties here, the number of citations plumeted. The number o…

> You need to explain how citations affect accidents.

No, I don't. You're plainly demanding a standard of evidence that you wouldn't in any other domain, especially if you were inclined to prefer the explanation. I'm going to take "citations affect driver behavior" as axiomatic, unless you can disprove it. I'm not going to wait until we have 100 studies to confirm that a commonsense mechanism does indeed function in the most parsimoniously explained way.

We have to act in the world.

We don't have 100 years to figure out if ticketing drivers affects their behavior to some ridiculous standard of evidence you invented just now because you would prefer that explanation weren't true.

People really need to stop allowing themselves to be held hostage to this kind of special pleading.

Post reply on HN