Mass-produced gasoline motorvehicle: Benz Motorwagen -1885
Mass production of electric cars: Electric Construction Corporation - 1888
Mass-production of chain-driven dunlop tire bicycle: 1889
Death Puppies: Why Pit Bulls Will Kill 25 Americans a Year
- Heart disease: 597,689
- Cancer: 574,743
- Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080
- Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476
- Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859
- Alzheimer's disease: 83,494
- Diabetes: 69,071
- Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476
- Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097
- Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364
Fatal car accidents are on the same order as suicides, and somewhat lower than Influenza and Pneumonia. Would it be accurate to say that we "accept 38,000 to 50,000 deaths" from each of these causes because they're such a low percentage of the total? It seems to me that it's not, that we expend quite a bit of effort and resources in prevention of suicide and influenza. So I am skeptical of your surmise, and I think there must be some other reason for our relative apathy over automobile fatalities.
WP I see your point, and to some extent I think we as a society just accept the traffic deaths as a cost of dong business, however there are substantial resources expended on trying to reduce traffic deaths, including PSAs, traffic law enforcement (crappy as it is) development of auto safety devices and the like. I'd guess, that if all costs various auto safety initiatives, research and development were summed they would vastly exceed the amount spent on suicide prevention.
Would be some interesting comparisons to be made for sure. My personal observation is the amount spent on the prevention of any death/injury is more related to the strength and attractiveness of the lobbying organization than to the actual number of deaths or death rates.
I think thats a fair question, and from my perspective, at least here in the US the answer runs something like we want "sound bite" solutions which require no actual effort to solve problems. If we can install seat belts and air bags to keep (some of) us safe in accidents, why have law enforcement, skills testing, alternative transportations and so on. So to say, Its the American way, sadly.
Did you find any useful or practical changes advocated in the OP or follow on posts on this thread?
Prefer to read suggestions for practical changes rather than simple utopian solutions that sound good late at night in a hipster bar, college dorm, or on a wacka-doodle Internet site.
In the realm of infrastructure, there are a number of traffic calming strategies that are well tested. In my local area, traffic calming would be seen as an infringement on individual liberties. Or worse. So I'd advocate changing those perceptions.
Technologically, you probably don't want to go this deep into the rabbit hole but I advocate for event data recorders to be accessed by insurance companies and law enforcement in the event of traffic incidents. I think that a lot of bad behavior is rationalized simply by the fact that they expect to get away with it and usually do.
I realize that your question is likely a rhetorical one, but it's a good question in my opinion. I'd like to give it a better treatment than this, but this isn't really the right time for it. Maybe later.
ILTB, Not sure I understand your point of view on this. Are you thinking the accident/death rate is sufficiently low as to not need additional action? Or is your post a reply to earlier rantings? Did you have any proposed actions, or is status quo fine with you?
Personally, I not into much handwringing, but better and more consistent enforcement of all traffic laws would go a long way in my opinion. Or, as many of my Econ professors liked to take about, it you want to see better driving, mount a 6-inch spike in the center of the steering wheel pointed directly at the drivers chest. Driving habits would change overnight. I am not sure that in the long run they would stay changes, because nobody actually thinks they are going to hit something/someone, but that would need to be seen.
However if/when reasonable suggestions for change such as your own are allowed to be framed/"owned" by hot-headed ideologues (as seen on this list) more interested in inflammatory rhetoric than productive advocacy, rational proponents of such changes can count on zero public support.
"to fight, the impossible fight, To dream the impossible dream"
ILTB's future on A&S
Note to ILTB I agree with you way way way more often than not, I am just jabbing at cha.
My view is that such anti motorist/anti-motoring threads should be redirected to Foo or P&R since the bicycling content is zero.
Yes it did, there are often timing issues on internet forums.
To ban the use of the tool because some people are to lazy/dumb to use it safely is asinine.
No one has proposed banning cars. In fact, I suspect a transition to driverless cars will be what really causes active transport to take off in the USA.
but according to the fhwa only ~25% of pedestrian/cyclist fatalities occur on rural highways.
Factors Contributing to Pedestrian and Bicycle Crashes on Rural Highways - FHWA-HRT-10-052
I suspect that within the next ten to twenty years advances in vehicle safety technology will make a significant reduction in accidents.