3 ms·
> Smaller cars are more dangerous given an accident is already occurring between multiple cars. Again, you're victim blaming here. The small car is not causin
by Schroedingersat 4y ago
> Smaller cars are more dangerous given an accident is already occurring between multiple cars.
Again, you're victim blaming here. The small car is not causing the danger. T-shirts are not more dangerous than guns just because someone firing a gun randomly into a crowd is less likely to get hurt than someone in the crowd wearing a t-shirt.
- LanceH 4y agoStill not victim blaming, go back and read the whole thing again. Which car is safer if you're choosing a car to be in? big or small? The bigger is safer and the smaller is more dangerous (to be in), in a multi-car accident. My whole post was on the rationalization of the choice of size of car. Language matters, as you say. It is about people not choosing the smaller car and not being the victim due to driving a smaller car. Yes, the escalation of size causes problems in aggregate, but not the point of what I wrote.
- Schroedingersat 4y agoThe small car is safer to be in. The person with the small car is causing less danger. You are participating in the victim blaming and the arms race by conflating the externalisation of risk with safety. And there is no need to aggregate to see the effect. It is present in every individual case. The person in the big car is not being safer, they are being more dangerous and more selfish. Just because they perceive that their selfishness is exceeding the added danger (something not borne out by the stats) does not justify it. Acknowledging the framing of the auto industry is making the problem worse.