5 ms·

They believe it's safe, because _they are_ safe in their modern SUVs. It's pedestrians, pets, bicyclists and other road users that they put at risk.

Chirael 4y ago
Nobody wants to hit pedestrians, pets, bicyclists, or other road users.
- croes 4y ago
  But we don't drive like that
  - doubled112 4y ago
    Agreed. About 30 minutes ago I watched a car make a left turn at a pedestrian in a high-vis vest. Either nobody is paying attention, not looking around enough, or the safety features (that A pillar) blocks too much of the view for our own good.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
usea 4y ago
You're trying to place blame on drivers of certain types of vehicles, and make a distinction between the behavior of those drivers and the "rest of us", putting them in an "other" category. This is misguided and ineffective. Even people who drive small cars do so in a way that they believe to be safe. Even people who drove before "modern SUVs" existed did so in a way they believed to be safe. Drivers of SUVs are not the ones risking the lives of others, while the "rest of us" are being safe and responsible. When car accidents are as common and tragic as they are, the fault isn't with individual drivers. Drivers try to drive safely, and generally do their best under the circumstances. They're just regular people, like all of us. The fault is with the system: road design, vehicle design, incentives (city design, etc), and education.
- throw0101c 4y ago
  > You're trying to place blame on drivers of certain types of vehicles, and make a distinction between the behavior of those drivers and the "rest of us", putting them in an "other" category. The behaviour of SUV drivers and non-SUV drivers can be exactly the same, but because of the sizes and masses involved with SUVs, the same event can cause much more damage when an SUV is involved. * https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/new-study-suggests-todays-suvs-are-more-lethal-to-pedestrians-than-cars https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/new-study-suggests-todays-s... * https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022437522000810?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00224... > When car accidents […] The word "accident" has the connotation that the event(s) couldn't be helped but ((almost) had to) happen. There is growing evidence that this is false: * https://www.vox.com/23016529/there-are-no-accidents-jessie-singer https://www.vox.com/23016529/there-are-no-accidents-jessie-s... Do a search on the phrase "crash not accident" for more on this.
  - ThunderSizzle 4y ago
    Accident vs crash is a regional thing, not a implication that it was avoidable or unavoidable. If anything, accidents are not intended though, even if avoidable in hindsight, and if it was, it's not an accident, but definitely a crime.

Chirael 4y ago

Nobody wants to hit pedestrians, pets, bicyclists, or other road users.

croes 4y ago
But we don't drive like that
- doubled112 4y ago
  Agreed. About 30 minutes ago I watched a car make a left turn at a pedestrian in a high-vis vest. Either nobody is paying attention, not looking around enough, or the safety features (that A pillar) blocks too much of the view for our own good.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

usea 4y ago

You're trying to place blame on drivers of certain types of vehicles, and make a distinction between the behavior of those drivers and the "rest of us", putting them in an "other" category. This is misguided and ineffective. Even people who drive small cars do so in a way that they believe to be safe. Even people who drove before "modern SUVs" existed did so in a way they believed to be safe. Drivers of SUVs are not the ones risking the lives of others, while the "rest of us" are being safe and responsible. When car accidents are as common and tragic as they are, the fault isn't with individual drivers. Drivers try to drive safely, and generally do their best under the circumstances. They're just regular people, like all of us. The fault is with the system: road design, vehicle design, incentives (city design, etc), and education.

throw0101c 4y ago
> You're trying to place blame on drivers of certain types of vehicles, and make a distinction between the behavior of those drivers and the "rest of us", putting them in an "other" category. The behaviour of SUV drivers and non-SUV drivers can be exactly the same, but because of the sizes and masses involved with SUVs, the same event can cause much more damage when an SUV is involved. * https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/new-study-suggests-todays-suvs-are-more-lethal-to-pedestrians-than-cars https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/new-study-suggests-todays-s... * https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022437522000810?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00224... > When car accidents […] The word "accident" has the connotation that the event(s) couldn't be helped but ((almost) had to) happen. There is growing evidence that this is false: * https://www.vox.com/23016529/there-are-no-accidents-jessie-singer https://www.vox.com/23016529/there-are-no-accidents-jessie-s... Do a search on the phrase "crash not accident" for more on this.
- ThunderSizzle 4y ago
  Accident vs crash is a regional thing, not a implication that it was avoidable or unavoidable. If anything, accidents are not intended though, even if avoidable in hindsight, and if it was, it's not an accident, but definitely a crime.