Originally Posted by
contango
I'm not going to say that 14 cyclist deaths is anything other than 14 deaths too many. But in terms of risk analysis a bit of perspective is in order. In 2012 a total of 118 cyclists were killed on the roads, while the total number of people killed on the roads was 1,754. Why do people look at the 118 deaths and conclude cycling is so dangerous, while apparently disregarding the danger associated with the other 1,636 deaths?
Obviously you have to consider the number of trips, number of participants, and number of miles traveled by both groups if you're going to do a comparative risk analysis!
Who can say why people blithely accept car deaths? It might be related to the psychological process of denial. More Americans died in car crashes in the month following 9/11 than died in the terrorist attacks. But nobody wanted to start a couple wars about it. The global public is more alarmed by a dozen cases of a new disease in the Middle East than they are by 1.24 million annual car related deaths on the world's roads.