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

The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

581–590 of 816 posts

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#581

Post by 1970-01-01 »

michael1999 wrote: post #499
1970-01-01 wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I too am unconvinced bigger truck/vehicle means things are getting of control. It's terrible how the NYT article has no facts on overall road deaths, so here I state one for everyone: Occupant deaths have a clear falling trend . So while pedestrian deaths are climbing, the overall deaths are still trending downward, and I shouldn't have to defend that the overall count is more important than the pedestrian subset.

You do need to justify it. There is a great moral hazard prioritizing the driver's safety over pedestrians, since the driver is most in control of the danger. There is very little a pedestrian can do to protect themselves from a driver on their phone who mounts the sidewalk.

Fixing on the pedestrian safety yields higher death counts overall. It is justified in quantity.

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#582

Post by to11mtm »

Scoundreller wrote: post #354
mschuster91 wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or: Gotta love regulation keeping our societies alive . The US averages 14.9/100k traffic fatalities, Europe 6.7 [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-r...

Canada beats the euro average at 4.7 but similarly allows regular Joe’s to drive a moving truck and trailer a car behind it with a general license. + Canada’s rates are better on a per km basis (even beating the Dutch). Annual/biannual safety inspections are only required in 3 of 10 provinces and those 3 are on the smaller side (PEI, NS and NB). Motor vehicle infraction enforcement is… an afterthought for Canadian po…

I think the majority of Canada's GWVR limits can be a factor; i.e. outside of Ontario it's less than half what the US limit is for a standard license.

I think also the lower number of lanes on routes like the 401 help, usually[0].

Even though it's been a while, every drive in Canada just felt more leisurely. Speed limits in general are lower, there's more stop signs where they should be.

[0] - Except when a whiskey truck tips over and it's now a 2 hour delay to the next exit...

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#583

Post by matheusmoreira »

mips_avatar wrote: post #571
matheusmoreira wrote: post #551

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For biking, there's a danger that's noticed, and we quickly pass a law that straight up bans that type of bike for those riders. From my perspective it's the other way around. Bikers don't pay taxes, don't follow traffic laws, they generally do whatever they want with total impunity while the law actively protects them. Meanwhile drivers pay taxes, get ticketed for violations and have to bend over backwards in orde…

Everyone I know who bike commutes also owns a car and pays taxes on it.

And I know plenty who don't own any actual vehicles, don't pay any taxes and yet they get to be a nuisance on the road with total impunity just because they are "smaller" than cars.

Pedestrian enough to use pedestrian crossings without even getting off the bike, weave through people on sidewalks and generally be immune to traffic laws, yet vehicular enough to use the road and slow everybody else down, but not enough to get taxed, require traffic law education, licenses. Everything about bikes is a contradiction.

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#584

Post by to11mtm »

tinyplanets wrote: post #429
Scoundreller wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canada beats the euro average at 4.7 but similarly allows regular Joe’s to drive a moving truck and trailer a car behind it with a general license. + Canada’s rates are better on a per km basis (even beating the Dutch). Annual/biannual safety inspections are only required in 3 of 10 provinces and those 3 are on the smaller side (PEI, NS and NB). Motor vehicle infraction enforcement is… an afterthought for Canadian po…

American drivers are also entitled assholes (I say as an American driver). How DARE you tell me I can't do what I want, when I want, or change my behavior in the slightest to benefit my society/local community?

God forbid a commuter wants to do the speed limit in the righthand lane without being tailgated!

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#585

Post by ErroneousBosh »

9cb14c1ec0 wrote: post #316
ElijahLynn wrote: post #250

I recently visited Portugal and it was so refreshing not to see huge near monster trucks on the road. Which have a very intimidating vibe to them. I was like oh look at people can actually function without big trucks, wow! What a surprise!

Very urban perspective. If you are a contractor or farmer in rural America, there is no way to survive without a good sized truck.

So why do they they have these useless American pickups like Ford F150s?

You can't put anything in them. They've got a load bed that I could *just* about fit a couple of sandwiches in.

Everyone here in the UK uses Ford Transits. How do you use something like an F150 to move plasterboard sheets?

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#586

Post by criddell »

somerandomqaguy wrote: post #458
mikepurvis wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But families towed tent trailers back in the 80s behind their sedans and station wagons, too. Maybe there's a bit of circular reasoning going on here where people bought giant vehicles because they liked the aesthetics and internal roominess, and then the prevalence of giant vehicles opened up the market for larger and heavier towables— rigid body RVs, seadoos, a trailer full of gas dirt bikes, whatever it is. I also…

I think you're romanticizing that era a bit. The most commonly sold CUV's today are smaller length and width wise then station wagons or sedans way back when. The Crown Victoria was considered a regular sized sedan for it's day and it's as long as a crew cab F150. The land yachts easily match the footprint of the super cab F150 with shorter beds today, they just seem smaller because they're lower.

> most commonly sold CUV's today are smaller length and width wise then station wagons or sedans

You didn’t mention height and isn’t that the actual issue?

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#587

Post by ErroneousBosh »

piker wrote: post #318

Those A pillars are MASSIVE liabilities in the UK where people just hop right out onto "zebra crossings" expecting the right-of-way to be yielded to them. On a number of occasions I have nearly hit people who I simply could not see crossing in my Volvo XC90 due to these pillars. I've been driving for nearly 30 years in the US and UK and have never felt anything like it. [edit: for future readers, please note that I a…

> Those A pillars are MASSIVE liabilities in the UK where people just hop right out onto "zebra crossings" expecting the right-of-way to be yielded to them.

They're also just MASSIVE.

I keep hearing about how "SUVs" are dangerous for pedestrians because you can't see them, but I've got a far better view out the front of my elderly Range Rover than I do in for example the nice little Kia Niro EVs or Renault Zoes we had at work.

Modern cars have so much crap with sensors hanging off the middle of the windscreen you basically can't see anything that's not immediately in front of the driver, and then they have these huge thick door pillars that block the rest.

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#588

Post by ErroneousBosh »

bijowo1676 wrote: post #322
piker wrote: post #318

Those A pillars are MASSIVE liabilities in the UK where people just hop right out onto "zebra crossings" expecting the right-of-way to be yielded to them. On a number of occasions I have nearly hit people who I simply could not see crossing in my Volvo XC90 due to these pillars. I've been driving for nearly 30 years in the US and UK and have never felt anything like it. [edit: for future readers, please note that I a…

I like Teslas Forward Collision Warning system which alerts me if it sees the obstacle such as car, a corner, or pedestrian on a path. there is also Active collision avoidance that will adjust vehicle if it senses a car on the nearby lane about to hit my side I think these safety systems need to be mandatory

> I think these safety systems need to be mandatory

Why do you think that?

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#589

Post by hackingonempty »

ryandrake wrote: post #538
decimalenough wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither. The OP's point is that shootings consistently make headlines and occasion a lot of passionate debate, while grandma or toddler getting mowed over by a SUV or monster truck doesn't and as a consequence nobody really cares.

Hence the saying: If you want to kill someone and get the lightest possible punishment, kill them with your car!

Best time to get them is when they are riding a bicycle.

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#590

Post by Marsymars »

CoffeeOnWrite wrote: post #576
Marsymars wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's honestly frustrating that you can't buy anything like an S10, an O.G. Ranger, Jeep XJ, or even the 90's and early 00's GM and Ford full size trucks. The Ford Maverick exists!

It's quad cab only though, unlike the S10 or O.G. Ranger.

Yeah, that's true, regular cab not available in anything other than a full size in North America now.

Though the Tacoma does come in extended cab.

And the Maverick has a clever bed that fits 4x8 sheets with the tailgate halfway.

Post reply on HN