> I'd wager that there are orders of magnitude between child deaths in cars due to heat and child deaths in cars due to crashes. Don't just calculate the risks

> I'd wager that there are orders of magnitude between child deaths in cars due to heat and child deaths in cars due to crashes. Don't just calculate the risks, also calculate the ratio of mitigated-risk-to-cost. Lowering the risk of death in traffic [1], after a certain extent of due diligence, can be very costly or impossible (don't go to work/preschool anymore). Lowering the risk of heat death, as GP describes, seems rather trivial - so there's no reason not to do it. [1] which is quite high btw, I completely agree on that point. In an 80 year life in the US you're statistically going to die in a traffic accident with a probability of 0.85%. Almost 1 in 100 people die this way, so most people will know someone. For comparison, the same calculation for the UK (one of the lowest) comes out at 0.24%, so there's ways to go there for the US. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-r...