Why the U.S. Leads the Developed World on Traffic Deaths
 

A new report on global traffic deaths illustrates exactly why the U.S. trails the developed world on traffic safety: we drive too much and our laws are too permissive of deadly behavior.

The global report from the World Health Organization - continues

I don't even need to click the link to know this is the truth. We're so, so, so dependent on cars.

Had a conversation with a coworker today and mentioned that I love being able to walk to most of the places I need/want to go.

He mentioned that it sounds so nice but he could never do it where he lives. I had to tell him, "yes, the only reason you live where you live is cars made us think sprawl was a good idea"

A) Ability to buy cars with high deadly potential (imagine full size SUV driven by tinny lady is losing control and flies in to 2007 Fit:()
b) large quantity of speeding cars caught on the highway during adverse weather situation
c) in other countries people are treating cars like luxury valuable item and drive mainly for pleasure, no need to rush to the work at last minute. At the same countries, if person feels tired sick blue (or red:) public transportation can be used.
The safety can be improved (in not so politically correct way) by:
-limit sales of full size pick up trucks to business users only (and charge taxes etc.)
-tax cars by engine size as well as horsepower

BIG supporter of this.

2 litres & under = keep current registration cost
2 - 3 litres = That + 20%
3-4 = That + 20%
Above = Another 35%

Above will discourage low income, low skill drivers form purchasing old, cheap, but heavy and dangerous (in wrong hands!) cars

So I should be taxed more for having an SUV that carries my family comfortably? My neighbor is a less safe driver because he has a high horsepower Mustang?

I don't think its the amount of miles driven but more our countries attitude about driving in general. It is looked at as a right not a privilege. In my state the state pays for drivers ed in high school. If you wait to take it then you have to pay. Kids take it before they are ready and the driving exam is a joke. People are more distracted now a days then ever before and they don't find it necessary to remove those distractions before driving. A full size pickup with a safe none distracted driver is safer then a smart car with a distracted driver who takes risks. So the responsible teen who runs his own grass cutting business can't buy the truck he needs to pull his equipment because he is more of a danger? The danger you put onto others is your own fault not the vehicle you are driving.

Seat belt use and laws are so relaxed also.

Your points are exactly what I envision! You make the environment where there are low power vehicles that have to get 40 mpg. I would work it where if they're getting over 40 mpg, then they can start seeing reductions in fees. I would eventually make it where the top (in my world) vehicles would be able to drive virtually free.

To your first point....yes.

To your second point....yes. Your neighbor isn't Lewis Hamilton. Also, my car is under two litres, it is quick & fun.

This is irks me to no end. It used to be the people who did not use turn signals. But when driving my work vehicle, I see drivers texting and talking on the phone all the time. I would love to invent some device that scrambles their screen so it reminds them to pay attention to the road.

If teen has grass cutting business he could buy 3/4 ton or smaller pick up, no need to buy full size 7.0 turbo charged Ford! If Smart car or Geo Metro hits someone else's car, the damage will be a lot less that if distracted driver is driving above named Ford. Even small cars though can do a lot of damage (back in 2005 05 Sentra, operated by undocumented driver hit my 79 Supra from behind, causing it to buckle and drop the gas tank; because of this accident (not my fault) I got medical issues resulting in restricted license!)

This would be easy to do to today's cars. Have it where the car locks to driver's phone and has to be off when the car is activated. If the driver is sitting in the car, he/she can use the phone. If it is in motion, it's off. Yes the driver could use another phone and defeat this safety feature, but have it where the law comes down on him/her HARD. Not like a $100 penalty like today!

Phone use is worst than just about all dui's................to add to the point above.........I guess there would have to be an app or two that has to be turned on. Gotta have the nav app for one. Even that is such a distraction! That can be worked out with app people, I think.

Attitude is a great factor. This why drivers with complexes want to drive a big, loud, fierce looking car truck or SUV (I have been cut-off today by one of those). Extra taxes will make them think twice before getting the vehicle of their dreams or switch to different way of showing their supremacy. PS: my mentally ill neighbor used to chase my Fit with 2000 Mercedes 430 V-8 he borrowed to fix (it ended up towed to local storage with rear wheels on the ground :)

kinda hard to make a comparison with other countries because america is so huge. where one might go no faster than 40km/h in asia to get to work, hardly a speed where car vs car accidents would be fatal, someone in the US could be going to work at 70mph at legal speed limit ending up dead.

is someone going to tell someone in rural america to drive his 50mile trek to work at 25mph (40mh) like the other 'safe' countries? i dont think that's realistically feasible.

In reality the people out in rural America is not causing the majority of the deaths on the streets, yet I bet there's a good percentage there.

Something needs to be done though. The study states;

• 1st leading cause of death for children and young adults 5–29 years of age is vehicle related
• 8th leading cause of death for people of all ages
• A 5% reduction in average speed can reduce the number of fatalities by 30% (page 27)
• Europe shows figures of about 1/3 less than the Americas.

I'm betting good percentage of them is regarding inner cities pedestrians and cyclists. Also the figures #1 and #2 above aren't expected to change for the foreseeable future.

The only reason people live in places like suburbs where high speeds are 'necessary' is that cars exist.

If not for cars we'd live a much more urban life.

So only race car drivers can have high horsepower cars?!? Yes and you could make your car faster then a Mustang and you are not a race car driver (maybe you are I don't know you). Maybe my neighbor is a SCCA champ! You must not be able to handle a high horsepower car safely if you are not a professional.

How many of these involved alcohol or drug use? Improper car seat installation? Seat belt use?
So there are 7 other things that are more of a problem. Maybe we should focus on some of those.
I can see this making an impact especially in urban areas and small towns.
Infrastructure and different way of thinking.

There is no clear cut answer and everything boils down to people and the decisions that they make.

If it wasn't for all the people in urban areas I would be ok with it but seeing as that is what makes it urban I go elsewhere.

People expanded out to rural areas with horse and buggies.

Rural areas and suburbs are very different things.

And yeah, screw population density. Just allowing for more exposure to people of different races & culture, better food, more walkable daily life, etc. So many drawbacks.