I live in a dense, walkable Boston suburb that is served by the MBTA commuter rail. But it's also full of "Masshole" drivers and adjacent to a couple of high-traffic major highways. I've observed a sharp increase in impatience and road rage, both on our 25 mph city streets, and on and off Rtes 1 and 93, in the last 2 years. Not to mention ever-more inattentive driving with eyes on phones. It's pretty alarming. I don't let my kids bike around the neighborhood anymore, I'm worried they will get hit.
It does feel like the one-two punch of [Trump + pandemic] has led to people feeling more entitled to let their rage and impatience out in public. I don't know how we recover from this as a society?
Boston drivers were cconditioned for perpetual bumper-to-bumper traffic. With traffic levels down, there was no bumper in front of them to slow them down so they just floor it until they find one.
I somewhat hesitate to anecdata this in the same general area. But...
For a time, I might have been inclined to put it down to people just weren't driving and had "forgotten" how. But I think that's hard to argue for at this point. I've nearly got run off the road on a merge or had a horn blown at me followed by a pass on the shoulder because I was apparently only going at the speed limit multiple times in just the past month or two.
Boston area driving has been quite aggressive forever. But I don't think I've seen it this actively bad/dangerous as it has been the past year or two. (And a number of people I know have said likewise.)
This article seems pretty misleading. Looking at the historical trends [1], there were more pedestrian deaths per year 50 years ago. And that is before taking into account that the population has doubled since then! There is clearly an uptick in recent years, but this nyt article is trying to hard to hype it up. Coming off historical lows, around 10 years ago, the percentage yearly increase can sound more shocking than it is- same thing when crime rates reach new lows and then bounce back a bit.
I suspect the number of miles walked has fallen quite a lot in the last 50 years. Like talking about how so few children are killed cycling to school without noting that close to no children cycle to school, compared to decades past.
A 45% increase in deaths per mile driven is no joke.
Further, you're also ignoring advancements in medicine, emergency services, healthcare systems, rules (e.g., cities in the US have drastically reduced max speeds), safety focused street design changes, etc. that mean that the odds of a pedestrian dying have reduced in general.
Comparing broadly to 50 years ago is not very useful.
Here's kind of a weird hypothesis worth at least considering:
Record pricing for used cars suggests that there's a car shortage.
Ironically, less cars and less driving could lead to
1. Faster driving because of clearer roads, and
2. More walking.
Combine those and it wouldn't be surprising to get more auto-pedestrian accidents.
One test would be to compare changes to car accidents with changes to pedestrian accidents. Reckless driving should bring both up. More pedestrians should only bring the latter up.
I found this article a bit... odd. Not the particulars of the case. Rather, what sounds like ready excuses and what read like an almost utter lack of individual responsibility. Yes, agreed, the lockdown measures aren't fun, and yes, they mean doing things which are uncomfortable (masks), or not doing things we want (gatherings, restaurants, all other restrictions). But how is that different from just being a member of civil society? That smells like... BS.
Though, the "salience saturation" concept sounds like one of the reasons for which people in the MIL world take up smoking.
I did not see this data placed alongside the number of traffic fatalities. Our intuition is that the new work-from-home/social-distance world leads to fewer cars on the road. Fewer cars mean higher speeds and possibly, less attentive drivers given the empty lanes. Increased pedestrian fatalities would align with this simple explanation.
There is a concept in kinetics, the 'mean free path', which refers to the distance a particle travels before it hits another. With Covid = fewer cars on the road = longer MFP = higher speeds for the 'mean drivers' before they hit someone.
Holland has found that the true solution is separate bike paths with dimensional hindrances so cars cannot traverse them. Here in Toronto the road stripes were found ineffective - 2000 pound concrete walled earth filled square rectangles commanded instant respect, and also serve as planters. There has been a renaissance of biking here and the government is responding - they could do better with an increase of one way streets that would allow more segregated bike paths.
Some of the psychological theories they have to explain the figures sound like a bit of a stretch to me. I dont see how they could test or prove them.
In other countries the pandemic + less driving has resulted in less deaths, as one would expect.
The bigger safer cars theory seems like a valid one to me. There is data supporting this theory in general, that when people are given safer cars they drive more recklessly. Also there is a significant measurable difference between the US and other countries in the size of cars.
My observation over the past year has been people are disregarding traffic laws more and more. The light is red? No worries! I'll just go through the intersection. And that's for traffic going straight! We've always had the problem of the left-turners slipping a car or two through after the light has gone red. Now it's 3, 4 and sometimes even 5! I'm now starting see people just go through red lights, treating the light like a 2-way stop. People never used to do that kind of stuff before, at least not in my neck of the woods. Oh and lane drift! Holy crap! People can't stay in their lane anymore. That's gotten a lot worse!
I too was thinking this was caused by the lockdown but now I'm not so sure. My state never locked down too hard in the first place and we've been largely "fully open" since last Spring - yet the driving has gotten worse. I was talking to my insurance agent about it and they said the number of accidents is skyrocketing. Great - so we have increased insurance premiums to look forward to which of course will be blamed on "inflation."
While this driver appears to be facing homicide by vehicle charges in addition to fleeing the scene, it is very common in the US for a driver to kill a pedestrian and face no criminal charges or loss of driving privileges as long as they stop and dial 911. While out walking I often think of a quote from a Freakomomics podcast that goes something like 'the best way to get away will killing someone in the US is to hit them with your car'.
The high rate of pedestrian deaths is a result of policy regarding road design, pedestrian infrastructure and lenient criminal charges. The driving culture is also to blame. Driving is a god given right. Cars equal freedom, and the bigger the better. Pedestrians are a nuisance and cyclists are the enemy.
Vehicles sold now are too fast for their intended purpose. You can buy a Toyota Camry with 300 HP and a 0-60 time of 5.1 seconds. Twenty years ago that was Porsche 911 territory. The upcoming Hummer EV touts a 3.0 second 0-60 and weighs in at 9000 lbs. Insane
100% agree. As a cyclist, I try to stay up on local road design, planning, etc. We design our roads for maximum throughput of cars, without much consideration of other road users. 25mph roads are usually wide enough to safely travel 50mph or more. Trees are removed, which reduces the driver's sense of speed. Crosswalks are an afterthought and signaled crosswalks are a rarity outside urban cores. Bike lanes get introduced alongside 50+mph traffic with no separation.
It's amazing we don't have more deaths. And disgusting we don't do better at designing safe roadway for all people.
To give just a few examples of the legal side of this: Here in NY, killing someone with a vehicle is a misdemeanor (unless you're drunk/high). People avoid this charge by claiming a medical incident while driving, and are often able to drive off from the scene of the crime. Hit-and-runs result in arrest less than 1% of the time. Speed cameras are restricted in number, location (only by schools) and hours of operation (they're off on nights/weekends) by the state. And good luck complaining about illegal/unsafe parking, you might start getting death threats from anonymous phone numbers[0].
It won't shock you to know that people are aware of all of this, and drive accordingly.
I live outside Philadelphia and tend to follow the local PHL news (as opposed to NYC's). A couple of times per week, there are reports of hit & runs, as well as an occasional the driver stopped.
In any case, anecdotally, the hit & runs tend to happen a night, late at night. I often wonder if the pedestrian and/or driver were under the influence.* Or, at the very least the car's headlights were off (as I was nearly hit a few months ago because of lack of headlights on).
* afaik, drug and alcohol usage has increased in the last two yrs "due to Covid."
I drove a 1990 Mustang V8 from ‘00-06 or so. It was 0-60 in about 6-flat. So that is a good reference point. Our 4Runner also makes 300hp and is actually sluggish, even by older standards. So not all cars are insane and it is really nice to have efficient 300hp engines for a lot of reasons. My truck makes 500hp and 1000 ft/lbs torque and gets like 18-19 mpg in its stock form. Extremely useful for towing and amazing efficiency given what it does.
So, some cars are too fast, but that efficiency and power also has a lot of practical purpose in many vehicles. Anyhow, I agree with the thrust your statement, but most people are responsible enough to not drive a powerful car recklessly.
"face no criminal charges or loss of driving privileges as long as they stop and dial 911."
I don't think this is necessarily true. Criminal charges generally require some form of intent. That could be recklessness. Most driving doesn't constitute reckless driving (per case law and customary enforcement). The police do investigate. I would imagine that many of the fatalities include drivers following the law and exercising reasonable care (as based on society's expectations), as well as pedestrians and cyclists not following the law. I would love to see the data to show the breakdown one way or the other.
This guy is facing vehicular homicide charges because he was driving an unregistered not street legal ATV and fled the scene. Probably also because he has a history of motor vehicle infractions too.
If he were driving a legal registered pickup truck, and didn't flee (and wasn't impaired at the time) it would probably be a moving violation.
It also seems to me really rare that a hit-and-run driver is ever caught. It pains me to say it but it almost seems rational to flee the scene if you were drunk.
> kill a pedestrian and face no criminal charges or loss of driving privileges as long as they stop and dial 911
If drivers were to face high consequences no matter what, would a possible result be that more pedestrians and cyclists die because more motorists would fail to stop and render aid/call 911?
>>The high rate of pedestrian deaths is a result of policy regarding road design, pedestrian infrastructure and lenient criminal charges. The driving culture is also to blame. Driving is a god given right. Cars equal freedom, and the bigger the better. Pedestrians are a nuisance and cyclists are the enemy.
Yea, but almost none of those things have changed in the last two year - so does nothing to explain the spike in the last two years.
What has changed in the last two years? Police being told not to police, not to pull people over for minor infractions, police departments being defunded or having their budget's cut - or being threatened with being defunded or having their budgets cut. Can't have to both way folks - like it not, the threat of being ticketed, towed or arrested has an effect on many peoples driving habits.
Here in the UK they have just changed the Highway Code (the rules that given all road users, including pedestrians) so that pedestrians have ultimate right of way in almost all cases. It’s the opposite of the situation in the US, a pedestrian in the UK can cross the road anywhere and I believe cars have to stop and make way.
It’s going to be interesting to see how it effects accident numbers, I’m worry it may actually make accident numbers go up.
It's not quite the opposite of the US. AFAIK in most states there are laws saying drivers must take all reasonable measures (or some such wording) to preserve pedestrian safety. For example, in my own state there are actually two such laws, plus a third specifically requiring drivers to yield in parking lots and driveways. So it's not the same as giving pedestrians general right of way, but it's not quite "take your chances" either. There are situations in which both a driver and a pedestrian could theoretically be cited, though I doubt that ever happens.
BTW I'm not saying whether those laws are right or wrong either way. Just clarifying what the status quo actually is.
It varies by city/state, as some other comments noted. In any case, in a few smaller towns I've been to in the UK, there are numerous crossings that seem incredibly unsafe to me from both a US and western European perspective. In much of the latter regions, marked crossings that aren't full-on zebra crossings with pedestrian-priority are incredibly rare, while these crossings (in which pedestrians yield to vehicles in a marked path) seem the norm here. With neither a pedestrian signal nor a priority marking, I find them rather alarming and pointlessly confusing given that vehicles sometimes have a signal for these same intersection, leaving pedestrians to just... guess?
I've slowly grown accustomed to accepting the priority of vehicles over pedestrians here compared to in the US and continental European cities I lived in, but London seemed far more pedestrian-friendly and there are certainly US cities that are even worse than the above.
That has long been the law in California, but enforcement is poor. California also has the "jaywalking" law that clearly prioritizes automobiles over pedestrians.
It's worse for bicycles: almost nowhere in the USA are drivers punished for killing cyclists, despite what's written in the vehicle code.
In my experience, if you are in the road then, in the mind of the driver, you should not be there and there are various ways in which they will demonstrate this to you. Ranging from an angry face, at one end of the spectrum, to purposely accelerating towards you, at the other.
So, yes, I think you're right, casualties are more likely to increase since few drivers are going to be changing their behaviour any time soon.
>a pedestrian in the UK can cross the road anywhere and I believe cars have to stop and make way.
Speaking as a UK driver (and pedestrian) - no, that's not really the case. At least not that pedestrians have right of way. I mean cars will hit the brakes to avoid killing you but I wouldn't recommend relying on that. The only place they changed the right of way recently is at turnings with 'give way' markings as shown in your link.
The small US city I live in made such a change, it we had several pedestrians get hit in the first year or so because drivers aren't used to it, can't see people very well, and pedestrians just figured everyone would now just stop. We changed the laws to restrict it to only crosswalks and added in a ton of new crosswalks. Even then, it was still a problem because pedestrians don't realize when someone can see them. If the are in the shade of a tree on a bright day, they can't be seen. There was a lot of learning and training to be done (some of it dumb), but now things are ok.
"Crossing the road anywhere" is quite dumb, I think, and I guarantee you'll see a spike of pedestrians getting hit for a while. Just because you can legally do it doesn't mean it's a good idea.
Many causes have been put forward for this. However, I'm not sure the all safety aspects here have been well understood.
Here in Dublin, Ireland the few weeks immediately after the lockdowns where horrendous for driver behaviour and aggression. It took a while till behaviours were back to the norm. It was almost as if people needed to get reacquainted with it.
But i thought that with the push towards shorter commutes werent we also seeing more pedestrians? More pedestrians = more oppertunities for accidents. We cannot get to conclusions about trending driver behaviour before a proper analysis of the underlying statistics.
Also cellphones. 5g = better connectivity on the move = more distracted people driving/walking = more accidents?
Anecdotally it seems to match my (and my Nextdoor neighbors') experience. As if reckless driving wasn't enough making the cars noisier is another thing that is bothersome.
People buying old cars and putting money in them is yet another recent trend everywhere that even I've participated in. It's fun to pass time trying to fix older cars.
US infrastructure is focused around cars. People don't walk much because cities are spread out for wide roads meant for cars, highways, and parking lots. That makes the distances less walkable. Bikes don't have safe dedicated lanes in many places. Many cities eschew trains because they would rather put another lane on a road because of traffic jams. However, because of induced demand, and the infrastructure forcing everyone into cars, the traffic jams happen anyway.
So it's a cycle that makes cities ever more built around cars. We need more trains, light rail, subways. As those become more entrenched, the city reshapes itself around them. Train stops become areas of development, which brings more things closer to people without needing cars.
In Austin Texas we have an absurdly well marked crosswalk on the way to the elementary school, to a close approximation nobody has ever stopped to let us cross. Our daughter was nearly killed once, so far.
It seems so many people in America are so fat now they don’t imagine people would ever walk, so they drive without regard for pedestrians and active hostility towards cyclists and park in the way of sidewalks, making walking or riding bikes to school seem so scary and unpleasant that few kids do it anymore, leading to more fat Americans who would never imagine walking. It is really depressing.
Drivers are the leading cause of dead kids. But for some reason we completely ignore it, while focusing on gun violence (which is also bad, to be clear).
I really don't know a solution aside from moving to a country that's better designed. The US seems too far gone.
The researchers found that motor vehicle crashes were the leading cause of child deaths in the United States, comprising about 20% of all deaths among children in 2016. The chief reason for the crashes was cell phone use by drivers and pedestrians, the researchers found.
Firearms were the second leading cause of deaths among children and adolescents in 2016, according to the researchers. Overall, there was a 28% relative increase in the rate of firearm deaths among U.S. children, likely driven by a 32% increase in firearm homicides and a 26% increase in firearm suicides, the researchers said. They found that the odds of a child being killed by a firearm are 36 times higher in the United States than in other high-income countries.
About 16 children per 100k die each year in the US
Funny thing is, The Netherlands used to have infra that looked more like the US once, but we almost completely rebuild all the infrastructure in our towns and cities during the 80's. It's not too late, it 'just' needs a lot of investment. The biggest problem is US culture around cars and mobility IMO. Better public transport is a nice start.
[+] [-] jpm_sd|4 years ago|reply
It does feel like the one-two punch of [Trump + pandemic] has led to people feeling more entitled to let their rage and impatience out in public. I don't know how we recover from this as a society?
[+] [-] Steltek|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ghaff|4 years ago|reply
For a time, I might have been inclined to put it down to people just weren't driving and had "forgotten" how. But I think that's hard to argue for at this point. I've nearly got run off the road on a merge or had a horn blown at me followed by a pass on the shoulder because I was apparently only going at the speed limit multiple times in just the past month or two.
Boston area driving has been quite aggressive forever. But I don't think I've seen it this actively bad/dangerous as it has been the past year or two. (And a number of people I know have said likewise.)
[+] [-] nverno|4 years ago|reply
1. https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/pedes...
[+] [-] CalRobert|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thaway2839|4 years ago|reply
It's an uptick despite reduced driving.
A 45% increase in deaths per mile driven is no joke.
Further, you're also ignoring advancements in medicine, emergency services, healthcare systems, rules (e.g., cities in the US have drastically reduced max speeds), safety focused street design changes, etc. that mean that the odds of a pedestrian dying have reduced in general.
Comparing broadly to 50 years ago is not very useful.
[+] [-] dhbradshaw|4 years ago|reply
Record pricing for used cars suggests that there's a car shortage.
Ironically, less cars and less driving could lead to
1. Faster driving because of clearer roads, and
2. More walking.
Combine those and it wouldn't be surprising to get more auto-pedestrian accidents.
One test would be to compare changes to car accidents with changes to pedestrian accidents. Reckless driving should bring both up. More pedestrians should only bring the latter up.
[+] [-] T3OU-736|4 years ago|reply
Though, the "salience saturation" concept sounds like one of the reasons for which people in the MIL world take up smoking.
[+] [-] evancoop|4 years ago|reply
A little searching suggests that in the latter quarters of 2021, traffic fatalities fell (https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/traffic-fatalities-esti....)
Before we jump to the explanation of angrier drivers (harder to verify or disprove), can we explore the simpler possibility?
[+] [-] unknown|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] cochne|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aurizon|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] everyone|4 years ago|reply
In other countries the pandemic + less driving has resulted in less deaths, as one would expect.
The bigger safer cars theory seems like a valid one to me. There is data supporting this theory in general, that when people are given safer cars they drive more recklessly. Also there is a significant measurable difference between the US and other countries in the size of cars.
[+] [-] taylodl|4 years ago|reply
I too was thinking this was caused by the lockdown but now I'm not so sure. My state never locked down too hard in the first place and we've been largely "fully open" since last Spring - yet the driving has gotten worse. I was talking to my insurance agent about it and they said the number of accidents is skyrocketing. Great - so we have increased insurance premiums to look forward to which of course will be blamed on "inflation."
[+] [-] stirbot|4 years ago|reply
The high rate of pedestrian deaths is a result of policy regarding road design, pedestrian infrastructure and lenient criminal charges. The driving culture is also to blame. Driving is a god given right. Cars equal freedom, and the bigger the better. Pedestrians are a nuisance and cyclists are the enemy.
Vehicles sold now are too fast for their intended purpose. You can buy a Toyota Camry with 300 HP and a 0-60 time of 5.1 seconds. Twenty years ago that was Porsche 911 territory. The upcoming Hummer EV touts a 3.0 second 0-60 and weighs in at 9000 lbs. Insane
[+] [-] alistairSH|4 years ago|reply
It's amazing we don't have more deaths. And disgusting we don't do better at designing safe roadway for all people.
[+] [-] ruddct|4 years ago|reply
It won't shock you to know that people are aware of all of this, and drive accordingly.
[0] https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2022/02/10/city-hall-condemns-de...
[+] [-] chiefalchemist|4 years ago|reply
In any case, anecdotally, the hit & runs tend to happen a night, late at night. I often wonder if the pedestrian and/or driver were under the influence.* Or, at the very least the car's headlights were off (as I was nearly hit a few months ago because of lack of headlights on).
* afaik, drug and alcohol usage has increased in the last two yrs "due to Covid."
[+] [-] bitexploder|4 years ago|reply
So, some cars are too fast, but that efficiency and power also has a lot of practical purpose in many vehicles. Anyhow, I agree with the thrust your statement, but most people are responsible enough to not drive a powerful car recklessly.
[+] [-] giantg2|4 years ago|reply
"face no criminal charges or loss of driving privileges as long as they stop and dial 911."
I don't think this is necessarily true. Criminal charges generally require some form of intent. That could be recklessness. Most driving doesn't constitute reckless driving (per case law and customary enforcement). The police do investigate. I would imagine that many of the fatalities include drivers following the law and exercising reasonable care (as based on society's expectations), as well as pedestrians and cyclists not following the law. I would love to see the data to show the breakdown one way or the other.
[+] [-] astura|4 years ago|reply
If he were driving a legal registered pickup truck, and didn't flee (and wasn't impaired at the time) it would probably be a moving violation.
It also seems to me really rare that a hit-and-run driver is ever caught. It pains me to say it but it almost seems rational to flee the scene if you were drunk.
[+] [-] adolph|4 years ago|reply
If drivers were to face high consequences no matter what, would a possible result be that more pedestrians and cyclists die because more motorists would fail to stop and render aid/call 911?
[+] [-] 988747|4 years ago|reply
Good acceleration makes driving safer, because taking over other cars takes less time (although 40-60 acceleration time matters more here).
Also, "sports" cars, designed for high speeds usually have better suspension, braking, tires, all of which make them safer again.
Cars are just tools, you cannot blame them for recklessness of some drivers.
[+] [-] unknown|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] ejb999|4 years ago|reply
Yea, but almost none of those things have changed in the last two year - so does nothing to explain the spike in the last two years.
What has changed in the last two years? Police being told not to police, not to pull people over for minor infractions, police departments being defunded or having their budget's cut - or being threatened with being defunded or having their budgets cut. Can't have to both way folks - like it not, the threat of being ticketed, towed or arrested has an effect on many peoples driving habits.
[+] [-] samwillis|4 years ago|reply
It’s going to be interesting to see how it effects accident numbers, I’m worry it may actually make accident numbers go up.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-highway-code-8-change...
[+] [-] notacoward|4 years ago|reply
BTW I'm not saying whether those laws are right or wrong either way. Just clarifying what the status quo actually is.
[+] [-] was_a_dev|4 years ago|reply
A contradiction leads to uncertainity, which leads to accidents
[+] [-] vinay427|4 years ago|reply
It varies by city/state, as some other comments noted. In any case, in a few smaller towns I've been to in the UK, there are numerous crossings that seem incredibly unsafe to me from both a US and western European perspective. In much of the latter regions, marked crossings that aren't full-on zebra crossings with pedestrian-priority are incredibly rare, while these crossings (in which pedestrians yield to vehicles in a marked path) seem the norm here. With neither a pedestrian signal nor a priority marking, I find them rather alarming and pointlessly confusing given that vehicles sometimes have a signal for these same intersection, leaving pedestrians to just... guess?
I've slowly grown accustomed to accepting the priority of vehicles over pedestrians here compared to in the US and continental European cities I lived in, but London seemed far more pedestrian-friendly and there are certainly US cities that are even worse than the above.
[+] [-] gumby|4 years ago|reply
It's worse for bicycles: almost nowhere in the USA are drivers punished for killing cyclists, despite what's written in the vehicle code.
[+] [-] dazc|4 years ago|reply
So, yes, I think you're right, casualties are more likely to increase since few drivers are going to be changing their behaviour any time soon.
[+] [-] tim333|4 years ago|reply
Speaking as a UK driver (and pedestrian) - no, that's not really the case. At least not that pedestrians have right of way. I mean cars will hit the brakes to avoid killing you but I wouldn't recommend relying on that. The only place they changed the right of way recently is at turnings with 'give way' markings as shown in your link.
[+] [-] gilbetron|4 years ago|reply
"Crossing the road anywhere" is quite dumb, I think, and I guarantee you'll see a spike of pedestrians getting hit for a while. Just because you can legally do it doesn't mean it's a good idea.
[+] [-] paulcole|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] P_I_Staker|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] rahulnair23|4 years ago|reply
Here in Dublin, Ireland the few weeks immediately after the lockdowns where horrendous for driver behaviour and aggression. It took a while till behaviours were back to the norm. It was almost as if people needed to get reacquainted with it.
[+] [-] mywittyname|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sharikous|4 years ago|reply
They don't respect traffic laws, including red lights. And the pandemic has really increased their numbers.
[+] [-] sandworm101|4 years ago|reply
Also cellphones. 5g = better connectivity on the move = more distracted people driving/walking = more accidents?
[+] [-] blinkingled|4 years ago|reply
People buying old cars and putting money in them is yet another recent trend everywhere that even I've participated in. It's fun to pass time trying to fix older cars.
[+] [-] mcdonje|4 years ago|reply
So it's a cycle that makes cities ever more built around cars. We need more trains, light rail, subways. As those become more entrenched, the city reshapes itself around them. Train stops become areas of development, which brings more things closer to people without needing cars.
[+] [-] samwillis|4 years ago|reply
https://archive.ph/5wWDC
[+] [-] totetsu|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gameswithgo|4 years ago|reply
It seems so many people in America are so fat now they don’t imagine people would ever walk, so they drive without regard for pedestrians and active hostility towards cyclists and park in the way of sidewalks, making walking or riding bikes to school seem so scary and unpleasant that few kids do it anymore, leading to more fat Americans who would never imagine walking. It is really depressing.
[+] [-] CalRobert|4 years ago|reply
I really don't know a solution aside from moving to a country that's better designed. The US seems too far gone.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ul_xzyCDT98
[+] [-] iso1631|4 years ago|reply
The researchers found that motor vehicle crashes were the leading cause of child deaths in the United States, comprising about 20% of all deaths among children in 2016. The chief reason for the crashes was cell phone use by drivers and pedestrians, the researchers found.
Firearms were the second leading cause of deaths among children and adolescents in 2016, according to the researchers. Overall, there was a 28% relative increase in the rate of firearm deaths among U.S. children, likely driven by a 32% increase in firearm homicides and a 26% increase in firearm suicides, the researchers said. They found that the odds of a child being killed by a firearm are 36 times higher in the United States than in other high-income countries.
About 16 children per 100k die each year in the US
https://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/22-child-deaths...
In the UK for comparision it's about 10 per 100k
https://stateofchildhealth.rcpch.ac.uk/evidence/mortality/ch...
I'm not convinced the US focuses on either gun violence or deaths from cars
[+] [-] dncornholio|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] sbate1987|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]