Vehicle fatality incentives

[niveklaen]

The argument about how 'masks don't work' because they don't protect the wearer v 'masks have to be mandatory' because your mask protects everyone around you - got me thinking about a long running issue with auto safety.

Our system is set up to focus entirely on the safety of the passengers in a car with almost no concern for the passengers of the cars around them.

This results in vastly more traffic fatalities than we should have. People buy SUVs and other big heavy vehicles 'because they are safe' but these vehicles kill several additional passengers in the cars around them for every one of their own passenger's lives that they save.

https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api...ication/813152

p6 money quotes:

When a passenger car and a light truck hit head-on, an
occupant was 2.9 to 3.7 times more frequently killed in
the passenger car than in the light truck. In 2019 the ratio
was 2.9.

When the front of a passenger car hit the side of a light
truck, an occupant was 1.3 to 1.7 times more frequently
killed in the light truck than in the passenger car. In 2019
the ratio was 1.6.

However, when the front of a light truck hit the side of a
passenger car, an occupant was 13.3 to 22.7 times more
frequently killed in the passenger car than in the light truck.
In 2019 the ratio was 19.8.

Any suggestions on how we could change our rules to reduce this public safety scourge?



For scale, traffic fatalities are a bit more than 20k a year - a bit more than homicides with guns...

https://health.ucdavis.edu/what-you-can-do/facts.html


(Note - my intent is for this to focus on the auto issue - the gun issue would surely devolve into forbidden political territory immediately, but I dont think that there is as much risk of that with the auto issue...)

[Bostondevil]

When you look at pedestrian deaths, the differences are even more marked. SUVs are designed for self defense, not for community safety.

[Bluedog]

Do European nations with smaller vehicles in aggregate have lower levels of traffic fatalities? I don't know the answer. Of course, that would still only show correlation. I would imagine traffic fatalities in a place like India with a ton of small motorbikes and cars has more accidents simply by virtue of road conditions, driving rules and regulations, and differences in driving behaviors/density of roads.

[niveklaen]

Do European nations with smaller vehicles in aggregate have lower levels of traffic fatalities? I don't know the answer. Of course, that would still only show correlation. I would imagine traffic fatalities in a place like India with a ton of small motorbikes and cars has more accidents simply by virtue of road conditions, driving rules and regulations, and differences in driving behaviors/density of roads.

a quick look suggests that most of your guesses are basically correct

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ted_death_rate

one curiosity is that it looks like the US went from much safer to much more dangerous than europe over the last 30 years

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_safety_in_Europe

They have reduced deaths a ton and we have not reduced ours at all

[DU82]

a quick look suggests that most of your guesses are basically correct

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ted_death_rate

one curiosity is that it looks like the US went from much safer to much more dangerous than europe over the last 30 years

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_safety_in_Europe

They have reduced deaths a ton and we have not reduced ours at all

Plenty of reasons for this. Aside from vehicular designs (smaller vehicles for the most part, as does the speed in most locations) the road designs differ. France, for instance, has built somewhere around 40,000 roundabouts in the past twenty years, whereas the US has only built about 10,000. (Don't remember the exact numbers, but if the US has built the same percentage, it'd be well over 100K in the same time period.) Roundabouts reduce fatal crashes at intersections by about 90% (a significant percentage of fatals occur at intersections, where vehicular paths cross.) Australia, which has similar demographics to the US, its fatal rate is 4.7 deaths per 100K population; the US rate is 12.9. (Australia also has a significantly higher rate of roundabouts at intersections.)

The European counties also take other modes of travel very seriously. Bike facilities and safety implementation is very common there, with resulting safety improvements.

[wavedukefan70s]

The argument about how 'masks don't work' because they don't protect the wearer v 'masks have to be mandatory' because your mask protects everyone around you - got me thinking about a long running issue with auto safety.

Our system is set up to focus entirely on the safety of the passengers in a car with almost no concern for the passengers of the cars around them.

This results in vastly more traffic fatalities than we should have. People buy SUVs and other big heavy vehicles 'because they are safe' but these vehicles kill several additional passengers in the cars around them for every one of their own passenger's lives that they save.

https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api...ication/813152

p6 money quotes:

When a passenger car and a light truck hit head-on, an
occupant was 2.9 to 3.7 times more frequently killed in
the passenger car than in the light truck. In 2019 the ratio
was 2.9.

When the front of a passenger car hit the side of a light
truck, an occupant was 1.3 to 1.7 times more frequently
killed in the light truck than in the passenger car. In 2019
the ratio was 1.6.

However, when the front of a light truck hit the side of a
passenger car, an occupant was 13.3 to 22.7 times more
frequently killed in the passenger car than in the light truck.
In 2019 the ratio was 19.8.

Any suggestions on how we could change our rules to reduce this public safety scourge?



For scale, traffic fatalities are a bit more than 20k a year - a bit more than homicides with guns...

https://health.ucdavis.edu/what-you-can-do/facts.html


(Note - my intent is for this to focus on the auto issue - the gun issue would surely devolve into forbidden political territory immediately, but I dont think that there is as much risk of that with the auto issue...)

Im sure both could be lowered with the actual enforcement of laws .
Cell phones are horendus and driving with a animal in the lap is a close second inmho.

As for round abouts we have a few they seem to be popping up around the charleston area .
They seem to work fairly well.
Our roads are 15 years behind anything that could handle traffic flow .
If we can figure round abouts out anyone can.

As for death rates for vehicle size .mercedes seems to build fairly solid vehichles even in thier smaller series .

Theres a few manufacturers i just wouldnt buy or want to travel regularly in the vehichles they produce .
Unfortunately cost makes them widely available .
Id like to see manufacturers forced into building better structure in thier vehichles .
If you take a look at the smart cars they are tiny .the cage thay is designed
Around the occupants is very solid .
Volvo makes a solid system aswell.

Other manufacturers could do this .
Right before 9/11 i got hit head on
By a drunk driver .H.P said he was doing around 80 when we hit .i was sub 40.
I remember his grandkids hitting the windshield .
His car was obliterated . I busted a radiator lost a fender bumper .
Sone other damage.
Dislocated shoulder .
I attribute this to the manufacturer of my automobile.
I will not drive another brand .

I sternly believe manufacturers need to step up the structural integrity of autos .even if it costs some preformance.

[BigWayne]

Any suggestions on how we could change our rules to reduce this public safety scourge?

Outlaw motorcycles and small vehicles. Make pedestrians wear flashing red lights.

Seriously, your hypothesis seems to be that SUVs are the problem. I would guess that you don't drive one so you are assuming this is a problem to be solved by changing other people's behavior.
Unless you're driving an 18 wheeler, there is always a bigger vehicle out there you need to try to avoid coming into contact with.
The government and the auto industry have actually done a very good job of making cars much safer in crashes over the past few decades.

[PackMan97]

You present a physics problem as a societal problem.

F=m*dv/dt

Mass will always win. I'm sure the numbers with heavy trucks vs light trucks or passenger vehicles show a similar pattern.

Unless we legislate all vehicles must weigh the same, this will airways be the case. Mass wins.

[mpj96]

EVs are a lot heavier than ICE vehicles.

Policy goal #1, meet policy goal #2.

[Bostondevil]

You have to look at deaths per quantity of miles traveled driven to make the most valid comparisons. The US traffic fatality rate per 100,000,000 miles traveled dropped steadily with a couple of minor fluctuations for decades after the creation of the National Traffic Safety Board. The rate dropped below 2 deaths per 100,000,000 miles traveled in 1991 and has never gone above 2 since. It dropped below 1.5 in 2003. While it is true that 2020 saw the highest rate since 2007, unless it keeps going up and/or rises above 1.5, it can still be explained as fluctuations around a mean, especially when we think about 2020 from a miles traveled perspective - 2020 was weird and probably shouldn't be looked at as indicative of anything. Reporting on "increases" in traffic fatality rates is one of the worst uses of the percent increase statistic out there. It is my opinion that we have reached the limits of how low current safety technology can bring the fatality rates in the US and that it will take new safety innovations to bring the fatality rates significantly lower.

You can look at per capita rates or per automobile rates if you want to compare the US to other countries, but they aren't as valid as per quantity of miles traveled.

[Skydog]

Way back when the US regularly had 40k+ deaths per year due to automobile accidents. Currently we drive more and have more people and cars and the death rate has been halved. I would say that is progress.

[rsvman]

Outlaw motorcycles and small vehicles. Make pedestrians wear flashing red lights.

Seriously, your hypothesis seems to be that SUVs are the problem. I would guess that you don't drive one so you are assuming this is a problem to be solved by changing other people's behavior.
Unless you're driving an 18 wheeler, there is always a bigger vehicle out there you need to try to avoid coming into contact with.
The government and the auto industry have actually done a very good job of making cars much safer in crashes over the past few decades.

Spoken, certainly, as if by a man who drives a large vehicle.

I would posit that the average person in the US drives a vehicle that is either a fair bit larger or a LOT larger than what is actually required to meet their transportation needs. And the cost of this goes way beyond causing more fatalities for people who choose to drive smaller, lighter, and more fuel-efficient cars, because these large vehicles are also contributing much more to greenhouse gases (making climate change accelerate faster, which hurts everyone, even those who don't drive at all) and utilizing too much gas (which makes gas more expensive for the rest of us).

I don't expect any of them to change their behavior one iota, regardless of what happens, unless there comes a time when they can no longer afford to fill their massive gas tanks. Most of them are wasting vast amounts of gas anyway by accelerating very quickly only to slam their brakes at a stop light they could see was red before they sped right up to it. And then they whine about how much gas costs and how often they have to fill their tanks, as if they have no control over how much gas they choose to consume, and therefore, choose to pay for.

And yes, I am aware of the fact that this reads as if it were written by a person who drives a small car and drives it judiciously; it was, and I am not ashamed of that at all.

[budwom]

When you look at pedestrian deaths, the differences are even more marked. SUVs are designed for self defense, not for community safety.

My understanding is that a lot of these pedestrian deaths are people on foot...car vs person on foot is not a fair matchup.

[Indoor66]

But good targets?

[BigWayne]

And yes, I am aware of the fact that this reads as if it were written by a person who drives a small car and drives it judiciously; it was, and I am not ashamed of that at all.

There's probably a guy driving a motorcycle that thinks you're an *expletive* too for driving a vehicle bigger than what he thinks you need.

It's always a dangerous game when someone tries to decide what other people "need," be it cars, food, healthcare, internet service, ad infinitum.
How do you decide what people really "need"?

Reminds me of a song.

"Is something wrong?", she said
Of course there is
"You're still alive", she said
Oh, do I deserve to be?
Is that the question?
And if so, if so
Who answers, who answers?

[Indoor66]

But some are more equal than others. They decide.

[mph]

I think I’m with BigWayne here. I don’t know what a workable public policy solution to the OP’s question would even look like. It’s easy to judge someone’s need for a large car, SUV, or truck without knowing anything about their situation. I can think of a lot of legitimate reasons they might want a larger car than others think they need.

Also, I think events of the next 15-25 years—the rapidly growing demand for electric vehicles and the somewhat less rapid growth of renewable energy—will substantially change the existing relationship between the size of a vehicle and its environmental impact.

[rsvman]

There's probably a guy driving a motorcycle that thinks you're an *expletive* too for driving a vehicle bigger than what he thinks you need.

It's always a dangerous game when someone tries to decide what other people "need," be it cars, food, healthcare, internet service, ad infinitum.
How do you decide what people really "need"?

Reminds me of a song.

"Is something wrong?", she said
Of course there is
"You're still alive", she said
Oh, do I deserve to be?
Is that the question?
And if so, if so
Who answers, who answers?

People judge their own needs. What I am suggesting is that many people misjudge their own needs.

And yes, you are right, there are probably people who think my car ls too big and too wasteful.

[Bostondevil]

My understanding is that a lot of these pedestrian deaths are people on foot...car vs person on foot is not a fair matchup.

Agreed, it's not a fair matchup. Something that contributes to the unfairness of is all - drivers of SUVs have a harder time seeing people on foot, particularly children.

[wavedukefan70s]

Agreed, it's not a fair matchup. Something that contributes to the unfairness of is all - drivers of SUVs have a harder time seeing people on foot, particularly children.

Quite a few have camera systems now that are insane aswell as radar sonar.
Im sure this has mitigated some of the suv blindspots .
Our last two you could litterally see all around the vehichle .