4 ms·

Do you have some actionable ideas on how to prevent automotive deaths? Honest question.

by jakear 7y ago

jMyles 7y ago
Indeed I do. 1) Cease all forms of oil and automobile subsidy. 2) (At the federal level) change the structure of infrastructure aid to states to incentivize pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure over automobiles. 3) Ensure the schools are accessible by pedestrians and cyclists and that they are located in areas which are surrounded by traffic-calming infrastructure. 4) (at the local level) build more curb-extensions, greenways, chicanes, diverters, and other structures to get cars away from schools, playgrounds, and other areas where kids play. There are sound, scientifically-backed tactics for doing this, but most of them require getting a place on the agendas of several legislative committees who are probably too busy talking about banning a particular color rifle or some other asinine thing.
- cameronbrown 7y ago
  > Cease all forms of oil and automobile subsidy. So punish the poor, basically? Bicycles just don't cut it. The better alternative is more investment in public transport which I assume has a better safety record than private vehicles.
  - ip26 7y ago
    I didn't realize oil & gas subsidies were a social program.
    - cameronbrown 7y ago
      They're not - but you've still got to think about these second order effects. Politicians wouldn't implement this because for every less well off individual they push closer to poverty, that's one less vote.
    - gridlockd 7y ago
      > I didn't realize oil & gas subsidies were a social program. They are, why do you think the US has some of the lowest gasoline prices in the developed world? If you want to see what happens if you raise gasoline prices, look at what's happening in France. Monsieur Macron would love to have approval ratings as high as Donald Trump...
- gridlockd 7y ago
  Bikes and walking don't replace cars. Can you imagine the commute of someone in a suburban or rural area, in winter, on a bike? Sure, if you can afford to live in SF or wherever there is enough infrastructure to support that kind of lifestyle, people have an alternative. Your proposed solution does nothing for the rest of the population. It would just make driving more annoying and expensive for them.
  - ip26 7y ago
    Can you imagine the commute of someone in a suburban or rural area, in winter, on a bike? Yeah, I just did it all last winter. It would just make driving more annoying and expensive for them. Where does the money for these subsidies come? Taxes. What if cutting oil & gas subsidies came with a proportional (averaged) reduction in taxes?
    - gridlockd 7y ago
      > Yeah, I just did it all last winter. Good for you. > What if cutting oil & gas subsidies came with a proportional (averaged) reduction in taxes? You can't "cut" subsidies, because there are no direct oil and gas subsidies. There are favorable conditions (e.g. lack of taxation) that are sometimes construed as a subsidy and there are externalities (like carbon emissions) that aren't priced in. You would have to raise taxes in one place (e.g. carbon/gasoline tax) and then lower them in another place (income tax?). However, I thought the point of the parent was to raise taxes to make less people drive cars. My point is that if you do that, most people will still drive cars, they will simply pay more for it.
      - ip26 7y ago
        A carbon tax plus a carbon dividend to the public (just for example) would leave average drivers paying the same, above average drivers paying more, and everyone incentivized to drive less, or electric.
  - jMyles 7y ago
    If we're talking about issues that require attention to save lives of children, then adding traffic-calming infrastructure only to urban areas will put a big dent in the problem, as most of the ICD codes which correlate with young age ranges happen in urban areas. > Can you imagine the commute of someone in a suburban or rural area, in winter, on a bike? Indeed I can, because there are areas of the US, and even more of Western Europe, where a mixed transit and bike trip can be achieved all year long. I suggest that you try out a commute-like trip from outside Portland or Amsterdam into the cities centers to see what I mean. > It would just make driving more annoying Boo hoo. Annoyance is a small price to pay for the power that comes with controlling a machine that kills 3,000 children in the USA alone. > ...and expensive for them. I'm not sure that's true.
francisofascii 7y ago
To me this is a much more easier problem to solve than the gun deaths issue. You might not like all of these, but here are some effective ideas... Enforce speed limit laws more often. Not just two hours once a month in spots. Enforce no phone use laws. (Stand on any street corner and you will easily spot this issue.) Ban car commercials on TV that display cars speeding. Install speed governors on cars sold in the US. Don't design city streets like highways. Narrow the width of the lanes. Install more round-a-bouts.
bobthepanda 7y ago
Most road deaths are caused by issues with road and vehicle design. We know that pedestrians are mostly killed by speed. 1. Where the speed limit is low, the road design should reflect that. Road should be narrower and wind. 2. High speed/high traffic roads should have separated facilities for pedestrians and cyclists. Where they interact, cars should meet pedestrians and cyclists at slow speeds, and at a right angle to reduce blind spots. Pedestrians and cyclists should not have to go very far (height or distance wise) to get to a safe crossing facility, because nobody in their right mind is walking 10-20 minutes, or even 5 minutes out of their way to cross the road directly in front of them. An inconvenient, unusable crossing is not a safe crossing. And people of all ages should be able to cross the entire road in one light cycle. 3. Add another dimension to vehicle safety tests; what is the pedestrian survivability of a head-on impact at 30MPH? I have seen literature suggesting that some part of the increase in road deaths can be attributed to the increasing popularity of SUVs, which are higher off the ground and thus prone to striking pedestrians in more sensitive areas while also giving more leeway for pedestrians to go under the car than over.
umvi 7y ago
Create ML model trained to predict DUI based on lane drift and braking patterns. Start using it to detect violaters and enforcing DUI laws much more strictly. Same with phone users and other types of distracted driving.

Do you have some actionable ideas on how to prevent automotive deaths? Honest question.

by jakear 7y ago

Do you have some actionable ideas on how to prevent automotive deaths? Honest question.

Indeed I do. 1) Cease all forms of oil and automobile subsidy. 2) (At the federal level) change the structure of infrastructure aid to states to incentivize pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure over automobiles. 3) Ensure the schools are accessible by pedestrians and cyclists and that they are located in areas which are surrounded by traffic-calming infrastructure. 4) (at the local level) build more curb-extensions, greenways, chicanes, diverters, and other structures to get cars away from schools, playgrounds, and other areas where kids play. There are sound, scientifically-backed tactics for doing this, but most of them require getting a place on the agendas of several legislative committees who are probably too busy talking about banning a particular color rifle or some other asinine thing.

cameronbrown 7y ago
> Cease all forms of oil and automobile subsidy. So punish the poor, basically? Bicycles just don't cut it. The better alternative is more investment in public transport which I assume has a better safety record than private vehicles.
- ip26 7y ago
  I didn't realize oil & gas subsidies were a social program.
  - cameronbrown 7y ago
    They're not - but you've still got to think about these second order effects. Politicians wouldn't implement this because for every less well off individual they push closer to poverty, that's one less vote.
  - gridlockd 7y ago
    > I didn't realize oil & gas subsidies were a social program. They are, why do you think the US has some of the lowest gasoline prices in the developed world? If you want to see what happens if you raise gasoline prices, look at what's happening in France. Monsieur Macron would love to have approval ratings as high as Donald Trump...
gridlockd 7y ago
Bikes and walking don't replace cars. Can you imagine the commute of someone in a suburban or rural area, in winter, on a bike? Sure, if you can afford to live in SF or wherever there is enough infrastructure to support that kind of lifestyle, people have an alternative. Your proposed solution does nothing for the rest of the population. It would just make driving more annoying and expensive for them.
- ip26 7y ago
  Can you imagine the commute of someone in a suburban or rural area, in winter, on a bike? Yeah, I just did it all last winter. It would just make driving more annoying and expensive for them. Where does the money for these subsidies come? Taxes. What if cutting oil & gas subsidies came with a proportional (averaged) reduction in taxes?
  - gridlockd 7y ago
    > Yeah, I just did it all last winter. Good for you. > What if cutting oil & gas subsidies came with a proportional (averaged) reduction in taxes? You can't "cut" subsidies, because there are no direct oil and gas subsidies. There are favorable conditions (e.g. lack of taxation) that are sometimes construed as a subsidy and there are externalities (like carbon emissions) that aren't priced in. You would have to raise taxes in one place (e.g. carbon/gasoline tax) and then lower them in another place (income tax?). However, I thought the point of the parent was to raise taxes to make less people drive cars. My point is that if you do that, most people will still drive cars, they will simply pay more for it.
    - ip26 7y ago
      A carbon tax plus a carbon dividend to the public (just for example) would leave average drivers paying the same, above average drivers paying more, and everyone incentivized to drive less, or electric.
- jMyles 7y ago
  If we're talking about issues that require attention to save lives of children, then adding traffic-calming infrastructure only to urban areas will put a big dent in the problem, as most of the ICD codes which correlate with young age ranges happen in urban areas. > Can you imagine the commute of someone in a suburban or rural area, in winter, on a bike? Indeed I can, because there are areas of the US, and even more of Western Europe, where a mixed transit and bike trip can be achieved all year long. I suggest that you try out a commute-like trip from outside Portland or Amsterdam into the cities centers to see what I mean. > It would just make driving more annoying Boo hoo. Annoyance is a small price to pay for the power that comes with controlling a machine that kills 3,000 children in the USA alone. > ...and expensive for them. I'm not sure that's true.

francisofascii 7y ago

To me this is a much more easier problem to solve than the gun deaths issue. You might not like all of these, but here are some effective ideas... Enforce speed limit laws more often. Not just two hours once a month in spots. Enforce no phone use laws. (Stand on any street corner and you will easily spot this issue.) Ban car commercials on TV that display cars speeding. Install speed governors on cars sold in the US. Don't design city streets like highways. Narrow the width of the lanes. Install more round-a-bouts.

bobthepanda 7y ago

Most road deaths are caused by issues with road and vehicle design. We know that pedestrians are mostly killed by speed. 1. Where the speed limit is low, the road design should reflect that. Road should be narrower and wind. 2. High speed/high traffic roads should have separated facilities for pedestrians and cyclists. Where they interact, cars should meet pedestrians and cyclists at slow speeds, and at a right angle to reduce blind spots. Pedestrians and cyclists should not have to go very far (height or distance wise) to get to a safe crossing facility, because nobody in their right mind is walking 10-20 minutes, or even 5 minutes out of their way to cross the road directly in front of them. An inconvenient, unusable crossing is not a safe crossing. And people of all ages should be able to cross the entire road in one light cycle. 3. Add another dimension to vehicle safety tests; what is the pedestrian survivability of a head-on impact at 30MPH? I have seen literature suggesting that some part of the increase in road deaths can be attributed to the increasing popularity of SUVs, which are higher off the ground and thus prone to striking pedestrians in more sensitive areas while also giving more leeway for pedestrians to go under the car than over.

umvi 7y ago

Create ML model trained to predict DUI based on lane drift and braking patterns. Start using it to detect violaters and enforcing DUI laws much more strictly. Same with phone users and other types of distracted driving.