Let’s make cars that don’t kill
#1
02-04-2020, 01:36 AM
Let’s make cars that don’t kill
(Kinda bizarre this is off topic, but OK)
https://bikeleague.org/content/lets-...that-dont-kill
LET’S MAKE CARS THAT DON’T KILL
We’re going to keep repeating it because we can't ignore this crisis: more people are dying while biking and walking in America. In 2018, pedestrian fatalities reached a 28-year high of 6,227 in the United States, up 51 percent from 10 years prior. In 2018, bicyclist fatalities reached a 30-year high of 854, up 36 percent from 10 years prior.https://bikeleague.org/content/lets-...that-dont-kill
#3
02-04-2020, 10:31 AM
(Kinda bizarre this is off topic, but OK)
https://bikeleague.org/content/lets-...that-dont-kill
LET’S MAKE CARS THAT DON’T KILL
We’re going to keep repeating it because we can't ignore this crisis: more people are dying while biking and walking in America. In 2018, pedestrian fatalities reached a 28-year high of 6,227 in the United States, up 51 percent from 10 years prior. In 2018, bicyclist fatalities reached a 30-year high of 854, up 36 percent from 10 years prior.https://bikeleague.org/content/lets-...that-dont-kill
#5
02-04-2020, 11:27 AM
An article from "The League Of American Bicyclists"?
Sorry but there just might be a tad bit of bias here.
You lose me right with the headline " Let's Make Cars That Don't Kill".
That's alarmist and click bait, at the least. My observation over the past few years, is that safety systems are being implemented in vehicles that DO support the safety of pedestrians. Is there room for improvement? Yes. Will they Improve, I believe Yes.
But nobody is purpose building cars that kill.
I would speculate if numbers of pedestrians and cyclists being killed are increasing? It has much more to do with an increase in the total number of people walking and cycling.
And once again, I trumpet SHARED RESPONSIBILITY.
You want that car that doesn't kill?
Let's create the pedestrian and cyclist that respects and obeys traffic laws and intersection laws. How about the pedestrian that ISN'T walking around looking at their smart phone, in a 1/2 daze and not aware of their surroundings?
Objectively to site an increase in pedestrian/cyclist fatalities, and then ONLY focus on the cause being automobiles and vehicles NOT being built with enough safety features designed to protect pedestrians and cyclists isn't fair.
Shared roads, shared intersections, shared modes of transportation, means IMO always SHARED RESPONSIBILITY.
Sorry but there just might be a tad bit of bias here.
You lose me right with the headline " Let's Make Cars That Don't Kill".
That's alarmist and click bait, at the least. My observation over the past few years, is that safety systems are being implemented in vehicles that DO support the safety of pedestrians. Is there room for improvement? Yes. Will they Improve, I believe Yes.
But nobody is purpose building cars that kill.
I would speculate if numbers of pedestrians and cyclists being killed are increasing? It has much more to do with an increase in the total number of people walking and cycling.
And once again, I trumpet SHARED RESPONSIBILITY.
You want that car that doesn't kill?
Let's create the pedestrian and cyclist that respects and obeys traffic laws and intersection laws. How about the pedestrian that ISN'T walking around looking at their smart phone, in a 1/2 daze and not aware of their surroundings?
Objectively to site an increase in pedestrian/cyclist fatalities, and then ONLY focus on the cause being automobiles and vehicles NOT being built with enough safety features designed to protect pedestrians and cyclists isn't fair.
Shared roads, shared intersections, shared modes of transportation, means IMO always SHARED RESPONSIBILITY.
#6
02-04-2020, 11:31 AM
You're calling out cyclists for being biased while posting on a car forum. Come on man.
Most pedestrian/cyclist deaths take place at intersections, with the drivers being the fault.
Drivers are the ones in metal cages that generally make the built environment worse for us all, they are the ones who should be making concessions.
Also pedestrian/cycle infrastructure is much, much cheaper than car infrastructure as well as longer lasting.
Ironic you call out pedestrians on the phone while drivers are always on the phone bc most people hate driving.
I love cars, but driving everywhere is the worst way to get around.
Most pedestrian/cyclist deaths take place at intersections, with the drivers being the fault.
Drivers are the ones in metal cages that generally make the built environment worse for us all, they are the ones who should be making concessions.
Also pedestrian/cycle infrastructure is much, much cheaper than car infrastructure as well as longer lasting.
Ironic you call out pedestrians on the phone while drivers are always on the phone bc most people hate driving.
I love cars, but driving everywhere is the worst way to get around.
#7
02-04-2020, 12:39 PM
I haven't kept a detailed list, but over twelve years so far of working uniformed patrol in a medium sized west coast city, I can recall one crash where a bicyclist was killed by a drunk driver. I went to another one where a cyclist had a car turn in front of him and went over the car, fortunately he survived- it looked pretty bad.
Every other one I can think of was a pedestrian jaywalking on one of several very busy roads, sometimes more than five lanes across, usually in dark clothes at night or very early morning. Obviously, this is a limited sample size, but every day I see people walking across the road with zero regard for the danger. For political reasons, nobody wants us to take any enforcement action, so they keep getting more and more complacent about it. Wouldn't surprise me if it contributes to the pedestrian fatality rate.
More likely that fitchet is on the right track with increasing population and resulting traffic density, though.
Building cycle/pedestrian infrastructure sounds good, but they took over a year and probably several million dollars to build less than two miles of extra wide path near my house. I've seen maybe twenty people on it in the year since it was finished, but as a side benefit, they had to eliminate the shoulder to make room for it, so now people can't get out of the way when an ambulance or fire engine needs to get by. They just sit there with the siren blaring behind them, for minutes at a time.
Every other one I can think of was a pedestrian jaywalking on one of several very busy roads, sometimes more than five lanes across, usually in dark clothes at night or very early morning. Obviously, this is a limited sample size, but every day I see people walking across the road with zero regard for the danger. For political reasons, nobody wants us to take any enforcement action, so they keep getting more and more complacent about it. Wouldn't surprise me if it contributes to the pedestrian fatality rate.
More likely that fitchet is on the right track with increasing population and resulting traffic density, though.
Building cycle/pedestrian infrastructure sounds good, but they took over a year and probably several million dollars to build less than two miles of extra wide path near my house. I've seen maybe twenty people on it in the year since it was finished, but as a side benefit, they had to eliminate the shoulder to make room for it, so now people can't get out of the way when an ambulance or fire engine needs to get by. They just sit there with the siren blaring behind them, for minutes at a time.
#8
02-04-2020, 01:21 PM
Get out of your car sometime and see what a difference 25 mph car makes as opposed to a 45 mph car. And many cars go 45 mph in 25 mph zones! This scale is seen on higher speeds too. They need to stop this >10 mph leeway on speeds. Should be easy, going over 10 mph on the posted speed and it's a ticket.
Granted it's hard to see going slower in a smaller car like a Fit. Unfortunately not every is in a small eco car. Would be nice to see that, but people won't feel "safe".
#9
02-04-2020, 01:41 PM
Calling All Cars! Calling all Cars!
You're calling out cyclists for being biased while posting on a car forum. Come on man.
Most pedestrian/cyclist deaths take place at intersections, with the drivers being the fault.
Drivers are the ones in metal cages that generally make the built environment worse for us all, they are the ones who should be making concessions.
Also pedestrian/cycle infrastructure is much, much cheaper than car infrastructure as well as longer lasting.
Ironic you call out pedestrians on the phone while drivers are always on the phone bc most people hate driving.
I love cars, but driving everywhere is the worst way to get around.
Most pedestrian/cyclist deaths take place at intersections, with the drivers being the fault.
Drivers are the ones in metal cages that generally make the built environment worse for us all, they are the ones who should be making concessions.
Also pedestrian/cycle infrastructure is much, much cheaper than car infrastructure as well as longer lasting.
Ironic you call out pedestrians on the phone while drivers are always on the phone bc most people hate driving.
I love cars, but driving everywhere is the worst way to get around.
Yes, I think it unfair to blame the manufacturing of cars and safety technology FOR a rise in pedestrian/cyclist deaths. If anything safety features on vehicles continue to improve in this manner dramatically. Even if they can continue to improve.
No, I'm not really calling anyone out.
Just saying, Shared Roads, Shared Intersections, Shared modes of Transportation means it's SHARED responsibility.
And finally
YES...I think pedestrians ARE less attentive to their environment today, then in the past. I think hand held devices have taught us to immerse with portability, into distracting environments.
Not denying this happens with drivers with HORRIBLE consequence..
I think you are denying a bias, when you say, I love cars, but they are the worse way to get around.
That's a valid personal opinion, but has nothing to do with whether it's a shared responsibility or whether we are currently building "killer cars". Hint: We Are Not.
#10
02-04-2020, 01:42 PM
An article from "The League Of American Bicyclists"?
Sorry but there just might be a tad bit of bias here.
You lose me right with the headline " Let's Make Cars That Don't Kill".
That's alarmist and click bait, at the least. My observation over the past few years, is that safety systems are being implemented in vehicles that DO support the safety of pedestrians. Is there room for improvement? Yes. Will they Improve, I believe Yes.
But nobody is purpose building cars that kill.
I would speculate if numbers of pedestrians and cyclists being killed are increasing? It has much more to do with an increase in the total number of people walking and cycling.
And once again, I trumpet SHARED RESPONSIBILITY.
You want that car that doesn't kill?
Let's create the pedestrian and cyclist that respects and obeys traffic laws and intersection laws. How about the pedestrian that ISN'T walking around looking at their smart phone, in a 1/2 daze and not aware of their surroundings?
Objectively to site an increase in pedestrian/cyclist fatalities, and then ONLY focus on the cause being automobiles and vehicles NOT being built with enough safety features designed to protect pedestrians and cyclists isn't fair.
Shared roads, shared intersections, shared modes of transportation, means IMO always SHARED RESPONSIBILITY.
Sorry but there just might be a tad bit of bias here.
You lose me right with the headline " Let's Make Cars That Don't Kill".
That's alarmist and click bait, at the least. My observation over the past few years, is that safety systems are being implemented in vehicles that DO support the safety of pedestrians. Is there room for improvement? Yes. Will they Improve, I believe Yes.
But nobody is purpose building cars that kill.
I would speculate if numbers of pedestrians and cyclists being killed are increasing? It has much more to do with an increase in the total number of people walking and cycling.
And once again, I trumpet SHARED RESPONSIBILITY.
You want that car that doesn't kill?
Let's create the pedestrian and cyclist that respects and obeys traffic laws and intersection laws. How about the pedestrian that ISN'T walking around looking at their smart phone, in a 1/2 daze and not aware of their surroundings?
Objectively to site an increase in pedestrian/cyclist fatalities, and then ONLY focus on the cause being automobiles and vehicles NOT being built with enough safety features designed to protect pedestrians and cyclists isn't fair.
Shared roads, shared intersections, shared modes of transportation, means IMO always SHARED RESPONSIBILITY.
Shared responsibility is sensible and is practiced by almost all road users. My argument is that most of them are vulnerable with the most to lose. Also your argument is pretty shown to be a smoke screen. Really it's the party in charge of 1.5 tons plus that are doing all the damage. Also how many of the road users assaulted you think were distracted users?
#11
02-04-2020, 02:09 PM
I haven't kept a detailed list, but over twelve years so far of working uniformed patrol in a medium sized west coast city, I can recall one crash where a bicyclist was killed by a drunk driver. I went to another one where a cyclist had a car turn in front of him and went over the car, fortunately he survived- it looked pretty bad.
Every other one I can think of was a pedestrian jaywalking on one of several very busy roads, sometimes more than five lanes across, usually in dark clothes at night or very early morning. Obviously, this is a limited sample size, but every day I see people walking across the road with zero regard for the danger. For political reasons, nobody wants us to take any enforcement action, so they keep getting more and more complacent about it. Wouldn't surprise me if it contributes to the pedestrian fatality rate.
More likely that fitchet is on the right track with increasing population and resulting traffic density, though.
Building cycle/pedestrian infrastructure sounds good, but they took over a year and probably several million dollars to build less than two miles of extra wide path near my house. I've seen maybe twenty people on it in the year since it was finished, but as a side benefit, they had to eliminate the shoulder to make room for it, so now people can't get out of the way when an ambulance or fire engine needs to get by. They just sit there with the siren blaring behind them, for minutes at a time.
Every other one I can think of was a pedestrian jaywalking on one of several very busy roads, sometimes more than five lanes across, usually in dark clothes at night or very early morning. Obviously, this is a limited sample size, but every day I see people walking across the road with zero regard for the danger. For political reasons, nobody wants us to take any enforcement action, so they keep getting more and more complacent about it. Wouldn't surprise me if it contributes to the pedestrian fatality rate.
More likely that fitchet is on the right track with increasing population and resulting traffic density, though.
Building cycle/pedestrian infrastructure sounds good, but they took over a year and probably several million dollars to build less than two miles of extra wide path near my house. I've seen maybe twenty people on it in the year since it was finished, but as a side benefit, they had to eliminate the shoulder to make room for it, so now people can't get out of the way when an ambulance or fire engine needs to get by. They just sit there with the siren blaring behind them, for minutes at a time.
I kinda grew up here in Sacramento. There was really NOTHING for cyclists in traffic in the center part of town back in the 80s. I come back 30+ years and it a completely different scene. They transformed the central part of Sacramento and did it at a relatively modest amount of money. Very little "building" and mostly re-striping and re-configuring. They turned the center part of town from a desert to a place people want to go to. Lots of action and I would argue alot of the main action there now.
And as far as emergency vehicle stuck in traffic, I'm sure the driver will say it's the worst at rush hour and on the freeways.
#12
02-04-2020, 03:43 PM
Didn't you post an article a while back that complained about how militarized cops were getting by driving SUVs? Not that your opinion has to follow that article, but asking for more enforcement of anything kind of goes against the modern leftist vision. Seattle has refused to enforce driving while suspended for years, because they say it's racist- apparently Seattle government feels that black drivers can't be expected to maintain their cars or pay their speeding tickets, so nobody can be accountable to have a driver's license. I think that's ridiculous, and inherently racist, but it's still what they do in Seattle.
Again, not saying your opinion has to be defined by anyone else's, but it's a surprise to hear anyone talking about more enforcement rather than less in the modern age.
If Sacramento found a configuration that worked and promoted economic development at the same time, then great, I'm all for it. Some of the cities close to me have had success with projects like that, others try to shoehorn it in on the grounds of being more green or more woke, and ignore the actual road layout. Those fail miserably at the cost of millions of dollars... much like the ambulance blocking bike path near my house.
Again, not saying your opinion has to be defined by anyone else's, but it's a surprise to hear anyone talking about more enforcement rather than less in the modern age.
If Sacramento found a configuration that worked and promoted economic development at the same time, then great, I'm all for it. Some of the cities close to me have had success with projects like that, others try to shoehorn it in on the grounds of being more green or more woke, and ignore the actual road layout. Those fail miserably at the cost of millions of dollars... much like the ambulance blocking bike path near my house.
#13
02-04-2020, 04:20 PM
And once again, I trumpet SHARED RESPONSIBILITY.
You want that car that doesn't kill?
Let's create the pedestrian and cyclist that respects and obeys traffic laws and intersection laws. How about the pedestrian that ISN'T walking around looking at their smart phone, in a 1/2 daze and not aware of their surroundings?
You want that car that doesn't kill?
Let's create the pedestrian and cyclist that respects and obeys traffic laws and intersection laws. How about the pedestrian that ISN'T walking around looking at their smart phone, in a 1/2 daze and not aware of their surroundings?
Texting more dangerous for pedestrians than listening to music or speaking on the phone
By Rob Picheta, CNN
cbs58.com - continues
#14
02-04-2020, 04:36 PM
Didn't you post an article a while back that complained about how militarized cops were getting by driving SUVs? Not that your opinion has to follow that article, but asking for more enforcement of anything kind of goes against the modern leftist vision. Seattle has refused to enforce driving while suspended for years, because they say it's racist- apparently Seattle government feels that black drivers can't be expected to maintain their cars or pay their speeding tickets, so nobody can be accountable to have a driver's license. I think that's ridiculous, and inherently racist, but it's still what they do in Seattle.
Again, not saying your opinion has to be defined by anyone else's, but it's a surprise to hear anyone talking about more enforcement rather than less in the modern age.
If Sacramento found a configuration that worked and promoted economic development at the same time, then great, I'm all for it. Some of the cities close to me have had success with projects like that, others try to shoehorn it in on the grounds of being more green or more woke, and ignore the actual road layout. Those fail miserably at the cost of millions of dollars... much like the ambulance blocking bike path near my house.
Again, not saying your opinion has to be defined by anyone else's, but it's a surprise to hear anyone talking about more enforcement rather than less in the modern age.
If Sacramento found a configuration that worked and promoted economic development at the same time, then great, I'm all for it. Some of the cities close to me have had success with projects like that, others try to shoehorn it in on the grounds of being more green or more woke, and ignore the actual road layout. Those fail miserably at the cost of millions of dollars... much like the ambulance blocking bike path near my house.
Not sure whats going on in Seattle though. Many of my friends moved up there a long time ago and never came back. That was a good indicator on things. I almost went up there, but went down to SoCal instead. Ain't really impressed with SoCal, way too many people for my taste. Other things too, but glad I'm out of there.
#15
03-01-2020, 11:15 PM
I watched two recent model dodge caravans cutting each other off for about 5 miles up the highway today. It was really entertaining. Like 2 large cows veying for dominance of the leftlane, I need a dash cam.
soccermom mobiles out for bloood! lol
soccermom mobiles out for bloood! lol
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
User1
Off Topic Discussion
14
10-09-2019 06:04 PM