6 ms·

I think a major change over time has been about vehicles, and there are no relevant mentions of "car" or similar in the article. They're larger, often faster, t

by prawn 4y ago

I think a major change over time has been about vehicles, and there are no relevant mentions of "car" or similar in the article. They're larger, often faster, there are more of them and sightlines are poorer. Drivers potentially on their phones too. As a parent of a 10yo, vehicles are my major concern with out-of-home autonomy. Growing up in the 80s, we kicked a football on the street and towed each other on skateboards with bikes. I barely remember a car being parked out there; they were all in driveways. That same cul-de-sac now is choked with parked cars that are each household's second or third vehicle and left on the street because it's easier than shuffling cars in a narrow driveway. Now, you couldn't kick a ball without hitting someone's car. A car driving down that street will have terrible sightlines with seeing a kid chasing a ball out onto the street or even seeing someone short trying to cross the road from behind an SUV or 4x4. Out camping in the bush, I'm comfortable letting my kids roam (as long as they watch out for snakes). Lots of other ways for them to get injured, but no cars. There's a difference between a "learning injury" and the bonnet of a 4x4 hitting their head/neck.

crooked-v 4y ago
On that note, there's the video essay "These Stupid Trucks are Literally Killing Us" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jN7mSXMruEo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jN7mSXMruEo, which includes various statistics and some striking visual examples of the absolutely absurd grill heights of modern production vehicles.
- nonethewiser 4y ago
  What do you mean by “production” vehicles?
  - crooked-v 4y ago
    As in, off the factory floor, before even considering aftermarket lift kits or other modifications.
  - samtho 4y ago
    Not op, but in this context, it likely refers to mass-produced vehicles with stock configuration.
  - Unearned5161 4y ago
    as opposed to DIY go karts and handcrafted hypercars of course
    - defrost 4y ago
      Or buyer custom configured purpose built vehicles, eg: https://www.oka-atv.com/ https://www.oka-atv.com/
  - reassembled 4y ago
    Vehicles in production for mass market consumption.
  - steerpike 4y ago
    I believe the most common definition for this context of "production" is "mass produced commercial vehicle"
  - saltcured 4y ago
    To add to what others said, it used to be that the absurd pickup trucks were all customized. Someone would take a truck as produced and sold by the manufacturer and add "lift-kits", maybe modify fenders, and add huge wheels and tires for some off-road purpose. Or just for the image of some off-road purpose. These would not always be street-legal but there wasn't much enforcement and it wasn't a high percentage of all the vehicles on the road. Trucks roam the streets today, in their factory configuration, that make those lifted 4x4 trucks from 30-40 years ago seem like reduced scale toys. It's madness. The most cartoonish, distorted adolescent fantasy proportions have been mainstreamed and normalized over decades. It's a Truck Body Dysmorphic disorder.
- mwidell 4y ago
  I think this is mostly a problem in the united states. I'm from Europe, and everytime I visit USA I am struck by how huge most of the cars are. Like, why?
  - prawn 4y ago
    I'm in Australia and older car formats like sedans and station wagons seem unfashionable now. SUVs and 4WDs seem much more common and are enough to present a risk to children and sightlines, IMO. There are some of the very large US-style trucks, but nowhere near as many as in the US.
    - smdyc1 4y ago
      I'm also in Australia, and it's gotten a bit ridiculous. There are now utes the size of American Ford F350s everywhere. Our streets and parking infrastructure are just not designed for it. It's become an arms race. You're now much safer if you drive a bigger car and you can see the road ahead much better than if you drive a Corolla.
      - paulryanrogers 4y ago
        Safer for yourself maybe, if you're a careful driver. Larger vehicles tend to have a higher center of gravity, so may roll more easily. They also tend to be more dangerous for family, and neighbors nearby.
    - jpgvm 4y ago
      In Melbourne they have taken to calling them Emotional Support Vehicles. I think it's a pretty apt name for a vehicle that has no practical purpose in a city.
  - simonsarris 4y ago
    Lots of people will blame consumers for wanting to feel macho or whatever but I think probably a bit more institutional than that: 1. Obama-era CAFE fuel standard rules made required MPG go up over time for different classes of vehicle. Except if your vehicle had a larger footprint, it had more lenient standards. The simplest way to stay compliant was to make larger vehicles. I think if they wanted the actually-desired outcome they should have just raised the federal gasoline tax, which has not been raised since the 90's, but they probably assumed that was untenable so we are left with unintended consequences. 2. The IIHS produces crash test ratings that manufacturers tout here and does not score cars worse if they are more dangerous to pedestrians. Nor do they take into account the other car in the collision. So to get excellent ratings makes an arms race of bigger-ness. Automakers started adding a lot of weight to vehicles, and side/curtain airbags that made the A-pillar larger (Between door window and windshield). Even formerly small cars now feel huge. It's hard to buy a truly small truck anymore.
- causality0 4y ago
  It's infuriating that there aren't even small trucks available to buy anymore. The closest thing is a Maverick but they're backordered a year at 50 percent markup.
  - orangepurple 4y ago
    Chevy Colorado comes close
Waterluvian 4y ago
My wife and I moved to a smaller city to raise our family. It’s been years and we still have moments of, “can you believe this is the largest road in the city?” Definitely hear you about cars.
4bpp 4y ago
It doesn't seem clear to me that there is actually a greater risk from cars now than our generation grew up with, considering that traffic deaths have actually steadily been going down in the US since the '70s [1]. The same way that media (social and otherwise) keeps getting better at keeping everyone anxious about kidnappers and neglectful parents all the time, it's quite conceivable that it achieves the same thing for vehicle-induced accidents. In its quest for eyeballs, it naturally provides everyone with the message that resonates best with their biases - law-and-order types readily accept anything that confirms the dangers of crime, gender roles types readily accept anything that confirms the dangers of irresponsible mothers, and urbanist technocrat types readily accept anything that confirms the dangers of selfish individual motorists. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in...
- aoeusnth1 4y ago
  Pedestrian deaths are way up in the last decade. This is not just a media panic like you suggest - it’s a predictable outcome of policy which incentivizes larger and larger vehicles.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- prawn 4y ago
  Aren't we talking about pedestrian deaths though? "Over the past ten years, pedestrian deaths in the first half of the year skyrocketed from 2,141 in 2013 to 3,434 in 2022 – a 60% increase..." That said, pedestrian deaths for children under 13 looks to have decreased in the last 10-20+ years. Maybe fewer children walking is a factor there. https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/pedestrians https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/pedes... More info here: https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/motor-vehicle/road-users/pedestrians/data-details/ https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/motor-vehicle/road-users/pedestr...
conductr 4y ago
I’d hypothesize that people drive more recklessly as a byproduct of less pedestrian activity especially children. I see many cars speed through school zones and it makes sense why, because there are never any pedestrians observed over years of my commute I’ve never seen a kid walk to school. The car pool line is longer than ever but it’s also usually off street in a parking lot area of the schools (where I am). Also as a dad of a 4 year old, I commonly witness other drivers quickly adjust their driving style when the spot my kid. It’s as if they realize kids are erratic and May jump out in the road so they become more defensive. If kids out playing was normal still, I think people would still drive closer to that as default. The car size thing is valid. Although I remember cars in the 80s, often of the 70s, were massive steel tanks and I doubt the braking distances were all that good.
- prawn 4y ago
  I'd agree with that about driving behaviour around visible children. It's considered to be something that would improve cycling safety too: more cyclists creates greater awareness in general, and safety for further cyclists. One thing I've noticed is that at a school near me, the school zone signs about driving speed are often shadowed/obscured by parked parents and trees from above. Stops it from being front of mind. That school has been there and I've driven past it for decades, but as you said, often it takes seeing a family in the area to remind me that it's a school zone and in school hours, since I'm usually driving past at other times of day. I participated in a citizen's panel for community road safety years back and thought that there should be a broader zone for a block or two surrounding schools. It wouldn't necessarily be as strict as 25km/h, but maybe 35km/h and rendered differently - coloured line markings, kerb colours, no hanging foliage or bushes higher than 300-500mm, more limitations on parking. Right now, parents compete to drop kids as close as possible to school, to minimise road crossings. Give them more confidence to drop kids further away. Limits congestion and builds autonomy in the kids.
  - conductr 4y ago
    Interesting. Where I am they signs are blinky traffic lights above and below the large “school zone 20 mph” sign. However the school is often a massive property and the actual drop zone is probably 100s of yards from road traffic. It’s in case of a kid crossing the street but as I mentioned no pedestrians exist. It’s common to have school zones in all direction of school property for a quarter mile radius. Some places where a school is next to a highway, the school zone extends onto the highway. No pedestrian much less a kid is on the highway (the school zone law just isn’t detailed enough to specify what to do in this situation). In the drop off lines, the teachers assist to keep the cars moving so you really shouldn’t start unloading early and let them walk. I think it would be good as you mentioned but would be against the factory line they’ve created. I think they tried that in decades past but resolved on this as parents complained it was too slow to wait. Where I live it’s very car dependent and people really do want to drop their kid off at front door and get off to their day asap above all else.
maphew 4y ago
What you say is true, our neighbourhood streets are more crowded and no longer suitable for kick the can and soccer and what have you, but I don't think it's the driving factor.* It is a concern for safety, or at least usually couched that way, but what I hear voiced most often is fear of other humans. From older bullying kids, to hoodlums, to drugs, to predators. In short, Stranger Danger. The "don't talk to strangers" refrain I remember hearing occasionally when I was kid in the 70s didn't seem to have much effect. We just kind of shrugged. Looking around today, I see it took deep root. ((Oh yes, pun intended. It's a beautiful thing when they also perfectly express the thought.))
brailsafe 4y ago
It's kind of insane to me that since the 50s, they just kept fucking doubling down on car sprawl and material wealth signalling to the point where obviously most people now live in a place where everyone needs their own stupid car and nobody can function with or without one. I got one for my first job out of school that required me onsite at the opposite side of the sprawling stupid city I'm from, and it was a 30 min drive each way. Losing an hour a day just to driving, right from the start. It eventually broke down, and now that I've been without one for a few years, the prospect comes to mind every so often to get a used thing for getting to trailheads a little more frequently; supporting the various recreational things I do. But... it scares me. It's a trap. It's a financial trap, a lifestyle trap, and more of a burden than it could ever be a blessing. Thankfully the every day risks of getting hit by an idiot in a huge truck or something are non-optional and an ever-present aspect of life no matter how you get around. For now, I'll just continue renting one when I need one, but it does put a barrier between me and the things I love doing, we'll see if that changes in time.
jefc1111 4y ago
This was almost exactly what I was thinking. I worry about my kids on the walk to school and back (with a parent). I end up having to take a very restrictive and disciplinary tone and am not comfortable with it. 95% of drivers are looking where they are going and not going too fast, so if a child is the road the driver just stops with no issue and we walk round (I live in a rural location and the walk involves roads in a small village with no pavement). Trouble is it only takes one driver gong too fast and not paying attention for something awful to happen. I hate taking this tone, but it's just true - the stakes are high.

by prawn 4y ago

crooked-v 4y ago

On that note, there's the video essay "These Stupid Trucks are Literally Killing Us" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jN7mSXMruEo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jN7mSXMruEo, which includes various statistics and some striking visual examples of the absolutely absurd grill heights of modern production vehicles.

nonethewiser 4y ago
What do you mean by “production” vehicles?
- crooked-v 4y ago
  As in, off the factory floor, before even considering aftermarket lift kits or other modifications.
- samtho 4y ago
  Not op, but in this context, it likely refers to mass-produced vehicles with stock configuration.
- Unearned5161 4y ago
  as opposed to DIY go karts and handcrafted hypercars of course
  - defrost 4y ago
    Or buyer custom configured purpose built vehicles, eg: https://www.oka-atv.com/ https://www.oka-atv.com/
- reassembled 4y ago
  Vehicles in production for mass market consumption.
- steerpike 4y ago
  I believe the most common definition for this context of "production" is "mass produced commercial vehicle"
- saltcured 4y ago
  To add to what others said, it used to be that the absurd pickup trucks were all customized. Someone would take a truck as produced and sold by the manufacturer and add "lift-kits", maybe modify fenders, and add huge wheels and tires for some off-road purpose. Or just for the image of some off-road purpose. These would not always be street-legal but there wasn't much enforcement and it wasn't a high percentage of all the vehicles on the road. Trucks roam the streets today, in their factory configuration, that make those lifted 4x4 trucks from 30-40 years ago seem like reduced scale toys. It's madness. The most cartoonish, distorted adolescent fantasy proportions have been mainstreamed and normalized over decades. It's a Truck Body Dysmorphic disorder.
mwidell 4y ago
I think this is mostly a problem in the united states. I'm from Europe, and everytime I visit USA I am struck by how huge most of the cars are. Like, why?
- prawn 4y ago
  I'm in Australia and older car formats like sedans and station wagons seem unfashionable now. SUVs and 4WDs seem much more common and are enough to present a risk to children and sightlines, IMO. There are some of the very large US-style trucks, but nowhere near as many as in the US.
  - smdyc1 4y ago
    I'm also in Australia, and it's gotten a bit ridiculous. There are now utes the size of American Ford F350s everywhere. Our streets and parking infrastructure are just not designed for it. It's become an arms race. You're now much safer if you drive a bigger car and you can see the road ahead much better than if you drive a Corolla.
    - paulryanrogers 4y ago
      Safer for yourself maybe, if you're a careful driver. Larger vehicles tend to have a higher center of gravity, so may roll more easily. They also tend to be more dangerous for family, and neighbors nearby.
  - jpgvm 4y ago
    In Melbourne they have taken to calling them Emotional Support Vehicles. I think it's a pretty apt name for a vehicle that has no practical purpose in a city.
- simonsarris 4y ago
  Lots of people will blame consumers for wanting to feel macho or whatever but I think probably a bit more institutional than that: 1. Obama-era CAFE fuel standard rules made required MPG go up over time for different classes of vehicle. Except if your vehicle had a larger footprint, it had more lenient standards. The simplest way to stay compliant was to make larger vehicles. I think if they wanted the actually-desired outcome they should have just raised the federal gasoline tax, which has not been raised since the 90's, but they probably assumed that was untenable so we are left with unintended consequences. 2. The IIHS produces crash test ratings that manufacturers tout here and does not score cars worse if they are more dangerous to pedestrians. Nor do they take into account the other car in the collision. So to get excellent ratings makes an arms race of bigger-ness. Automakers started adding a lot of weight to vehicles, and side/curtain airbags that made the A-pillar larger (Between door window and windshield). Even formerly small cars now feel huge. It's hard to buy a truly small truck anymore.
causality0 4y ago
It's infuriating that there aren't even small trucks available to buy anymore. The closest thing is a Maverick but they're backordered a year at 50 percent markup.
- orangepurple 4y ago
  Chevy Colorado comes close

Waterluvian 4y ago

My wife and I moved to a smaller city to raise our family. It’s been years and we still have moments of, “can you believe this is the largest road in the city?” Definitely hear you about cars.

4bpp 4y ago

It doesn't seem clear to me that there is actually a greater risk from cars now than our generation grew up with, considering that traffic deaths have actually steadily been going down in the US since the '70s [1]. The same way that media (social and otherwise) keeps getting better at keeping everyone anxious about kidnappers and neglectful parents all the time, it's quite conceivable that it achieves the same thing for vehicle-induced accidents. In its quest for eyeballs, it naturally provides everyone with the message that resonates best with their biases - law-and-order types readily accept anything that confirms the dangers of crime, gender roles types readily accept anything that confirms the dangers of irresponsible mothers, and urbanist technocrat types readily accept anything that confirms the dangers of selfish individual motorists. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in...

aoeusnth1 4y ago
Pedestrian deaths are way up in the last decade. This is not just a media panic like you suggest - it’s a predictable outcome of policy which incentivizes larger and larger vehicles.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
prawn 4y ago
Aren't we talking about pedestrian deaths though? "Over the past ten years, pedestrian deaths in the first half of the year skyrocketed from 2,141 in 2013 to 3,434 in 2022 – a 60% increase..." That said, pedestrian deaths for children under 13 looks to have decreased in the last 10-20+ years. Maybe fewer children walking is a factor there. https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/pedestrians https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/pedes... More info here: https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/motor-vehicle/road-users/pedestrians/data-details/ https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/motor-vehicle/road-users/pedestr...

conductr 4y ago

I’d hypothesize that people drive more recklessly as a byproduct of less pedestrian activity especially children. I see many cars speed through school zones and it makes sense why, because there are never any pedestrians observed over years of my commute I’ve never seen a kid walk to school. The car pool line is longer than ever but it’s also usually off street in a parking lot area of the schools (where I am). Also as a dad of a 4 year old, I commonly witness other drivers quickly adjust their driving style when the spot my kid. It’s as if they realize kids are erratic and May jump out in the road so they become more defensive. If kids out playing was normal still, I think people would still drive closer to that as default. The car size thing is valid. Although I remember cars in the 80s, often of the 70s, were massive steel tanks and I doubt the braking distances were all that good.

prawn 4y ago
I'd agree with that about driving behaviour around visible children. It's considered to be something that would improve cycling safety too: more cyclists creates greater awareness in general, and safety for further cyclists. One thing I've noticed is that at a school near me, the school zone signs about driving speed are often shadowed/obscured by parked parents and trees from above. Stops it from being front of mind. That school has been there and I've driven past it for decades, but as you said, often it takes seeing a family in the area to remind me that it's a school zone and in school hours, since I'm usually driving past at other times of day. I participated in a citizen's panel for community road safety years back and thought that there should be a broader zone for a block or two surrounding schools. It wouldn't necessarily be as strict as 25km/h, but maybe 35km/h and rendered differently - coloured line markings, kerb colours, no hanging foliage or bushes higher than 300-500mm, more limitations on parking. Right now, parents compete to drop kids as close as possible to school, to minimise road crossings. Give them more confidence to drop kids further away. Limits congestion and builds autonomy in the kids.
- conductr 4y ago
  Interesting. Where I am they signs are blinky traffic lights above and below the large “school zone 20 mph” sign. However the school is often a massive property and the actual drop zone is probably 100s of yards from road traffic. It’s in case of a kid crossing the street but as I mentioned no pedestrians exist. It’s common to have school zones in all direction of school property for a quarter mile radius. Some places where a school is next to a highway, the school zone extends onto the highway. No pedestrian much less a kid is on the highway (the school zone law just isn’t detailed enough to specify what to do in this situation). In the drop off lines, the teachers assist to keep the cars moving so you really shouldn’t start unloading early and let them walk. I think it would be good as you mentioned but would be against the factory line they’ve created. I think they tried that in decades past but resolved on this as parents complained it was too slow to wait. Where I live it’s very car dependent and people really do want to drop their kid off at front door and get off to their day asap above all else.

maphew 4y ago

What you say is true, our neighbourhood streets are more crowded and no longer suitable for kick the can and soccer and what have you, but I don't think it's the driving factor.* It is a concern for safety, or at least usually couched that way, but what I hear voiced most often is fear of other humans. From older bullying kids, to hoodlums, to drugs, to predators. In short, Stranger Danger. The "don't talk to strangers" refrain I remember hearing occasionally when I was kid in the 70s didn't seem to have much effect. We just kind of shrugged. Looking around today, I see it took deep root. ((Oh yes, pun intended. It's a beautiful thing when they also perfectly express the thought.))

brailsafe 4y ago

It's kind of insane to me that since the 50s, they just kept fucking doubling down on car sprawl and material wealth signalling to the point where obviously most people now live in a place where everyone needs their own stupid car and nobody can function with or without one. I got one for my first job out of school that required me onsite at the opposite side of the sprawling stupid city I'm from, and it was a 30 min drive each way. Losing an hour a day just to driving, right from the start. It eventually broke down, and now that I've been without one for a few years, the prospect comes to mind every so often to get a used thing for getting to trailheads a little more frequently; supporting the various recreational things I do. But... it scares me. It's a trap. It's a financial trap, a lifestyle trap, and more of a burden than it could ever be a blessing. Thankfully the every day risks of getting hit by an idiot in a huge truck or something are non-optional and an ever-present aspect of life no matter how you get around. For now, I'll just continue renting one when I need one, but it does put a barrier between me and the things I love doing, we'll see if that changes in time.

jefc1111 4y ago

This was almost exactly what I was thinking. I worry about my kids on the walk to school and back (with a parent). I end up having to take a very restrictive and disciplinary tone and am not comfortable with it. 95% of drivers are looking where they are going and not going too fast, so if a child is the road the driver just stops with no issue and we walk round (I live in a rural location and the walk involves roads in a small village with no pavement). Trouble is it only takes one driver gong too fast and not paying attention for something awful to happen. I hate taking this tone, but it's just true - the stakes are high.