4 ms·

Except that most vehicular deaths don't occur in cities [1]. Banning cars in metro areas would do basically nothing to change the things you mention. Banning

Except that most vehicular deaths don't occur in cities [1]. Banning cars in metro areas would do basically nothing to change the things you mention. Banning cars where deaths actually happen is a complete non-starter. [1] https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2015/10/the-geography-of-car-deaths-in-america/410494/ https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2015/10/the-geography...

erikpukinskis 7y ago
I happen to know that 100% of vehicular deaths in San Francisco happen in the city, so your numbers are pretty suspect.
- barrkel 7y ago
  You can't mix and match stats like that.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- mdorazio 7y ago
  Great, how many vehicular deaths is that exactly, and how many are cars instead of other vehicles not banned? For comparison, let's also make sure to check the number of CalTrain and BART deaths each year (at least 20 last year)[1]. [1] https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/09/28/as-deaths-rise-on-bay-area-train-tracks-big-solutions-are-a-long-way-off/ https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/09/28/as-deaths-rise-on-bay...
CydeWeys 7y ago
New York City sees ~200 traffic deaths every year, the good majority of them pedestrians, and it's traumatic every time it happens. Sure, as a percentage of our population, we have fewer people dying from car crashes than Montana, but so what? Does that mean the 200 deaths per year is acceptable, especially when we can do a lot more to bring down the number of deaths than Montana can because we're dense enough for people to use alternatives? It would make a real difference in NYC, so why wouldn't we do it. I'm always a little bit on edge when crossing intersections on foot, and especially when biking, because so many drivers are so erratic and dangerous. We don't need to put up with it.
- mdorazio 7y ago
  What does "traffic deaths" mean and what are the detailed stats on that? I'd love to see a source because I strongly suspect a large portion of those are not private passenger vehicle collisions. Also, every transportation method includes accidents. From [1] describing NYC subway safety, "There were nearly 900 incidents last year [2017] in which someone was on the tracks or was hit by a train after getting too close while on the platform." Should we also ban subways because people die as a result of them? [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/17/nyregion/nyc-subway-tracks-delays.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/17/nyregion/nyc-subway-track...
  - CydeWeys 7y ago
    The majority of those are people on foot or on bike who get run over by cars and trucks. The rest are people in cars and trucks who die either in single vehicle crashes or in crashes with other vehicles. This doesn't include subway deaths; that's a separate stat. I'm not playing semantic games here. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/01/nyregion/nyc-biking-deaths.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/01/nyregion/nyc-biking-death... As for the subway, that's a separate topic. I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish with your whataboutism. Yes, of course it can and should be made safer. One obvious way to do so would be to add platform gates as many other subway systems worldwide have. But the subway is already a lot safer than on-street vehicle traffic, and no, of course we shouldn't ban it.
    - mdorazio 7y ago
      Your NYT article does not provide any actual detailed statistics on type of vehicle involved, let alone whether the drivers were always at fault. And I'm pointing out the issues with transportation safety in general because people such as yourself demonize cars specifically when it's not at all clear that cars are the real problem, let alone the biggest one. Look at Tokyo for example. Cars are all over the city, but pedestrian fatalities are extremely low because affordances are given to pedestrian traffic (ex. elevated crosswalks). If you want to sell people on banning personal vehicles in cities, the burden of proof is on you that 1) cars are the best problem to focus on, 2) the only way to solve the problem is to ban cars, and 3) the available alternatives are actually better than cars
bloak 7y ago
Does "vehicular deaths" include deaths caused by air pollution? I think I've read that cars cause more deaths through air pollution than through collisions.

erikpukinskis 7y ago

I happen to know that 100% of vehicular deaths in San Francisco happen in the city, so your numbers are pretty suspect.

barrkel 7y ago
You can't mix and match stats like that.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
mdorazio 7y ago
Great, how many vehicular deaths is that exactly, and how many are cars instead of other vehicles not banned? For comparison, let's also make sure to check the number of CalTrain and BART deaths each year (at least 20 last year)[1]. [1] https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/09/28/as-deaths-rise-on-bay-area-train-tracks-big-solutions-are-a-long-way-off/ https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/09/28/as-deaths-rise-on-bay...

CydeWeys 7y ago

New York City sees ~200 traffic deaths every year, the good majority of them pedestrians, and it's traumatic every time it happens. Sure, as a percentage of our population, we have fewer people dying from car crashes than Montana, but so what? Does that mean the 200 deaths per year is acceptable, especially when we can do a lot more to bring down the number of deaths than Montana can because we're dense enough for people to use alternatives? It would make a real difference in NYC, so why wouldn't we do it. I'm always a little bit on edge when crossing intersections on foot, and especially when biking, because so many drivers are so erratic and dangerous. We don't need to put up with it.

mdorazio 7y ago
What does "traffic deaths" mean and what are the detailed stats on that? I'd love to see a source because I strongly suspect a large portion of those are not private passenger vehicle collisions. Also, every transportation method includes accidents. From [1] describing NYC subway safety, "There were nearly 900 incidents last year [2017] in which someone was on the tracks or was hit by a train after getting too close while on the platform." Should we also ban subways because people die as a result of them? [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/17/nyregion/nyc-subway-tracks-delays.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/17/nyregion/nyc-subway-track...
- CydeWeys 7y ago
  The majority of those are people on foot or on bike who get run over by cars and trucks. The rest are people in cars and trucks who die either in single vehicle crashes or in crashes with other vehicles. This doesn't include subway deaths; that's a separate stat. I'm not playing semantic games here. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/01/nyregion/nyc-biking-deaths.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/01/nyregion/nyc-biking-death... As for the subway, that's a separate topic. I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish with your whataboutism. Yes, of course it can and should be made safer. One obvious way to do so would be to add platform gates as many other subway systems worldwide have. But the subway is already a lot safer than on-street vehicle traffic, and no, of course we shouldn't ban it.
  - mdorazio 7y ago
    Your NYT article does not provide any actual detailed statistics on type of vehicle involved, let alone whether the drivers were always at fault. And I'm pointing out the issues with transportation safety in general because people such as yourself demonize cars specifically when it's not at all clear that cars are the real problem, let alone the biggest one. Look at Tokyo for example. Cars are all over the city, but pedestrian fatalities are extremely low because affordances are given to pedestrian traffic (ex. elevated crosswalks). If you want to sell people on banning personal vehicles in cities, the burden of proof is on you that 1) cars are the best problem to focus on, 2) the only way to solve the problem is to ban cars, and 3) the available alternatives are actually better than cars

bloak 7y ago

Does "vehicular deaths" include deaths caused by air pollution? I think I've read that cars cause more deaths through air pollution than through collisions.