5 ms·

> The deaths by vehicles is astonishing, last year in the USA 42,795 people died in road traffic incidents ( https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/traffic-crash-

> The deaths by vehicles is astonishing, last year in the USA 42,795 people died in road traffic incidents ( https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/traffic-crash-death-est https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/traffic-crash-death-est... ), in the UK the number is 1,695 ( https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-road-casua https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-road-casua... ). I'm not sure whether this was your point, but USA population is just under 5 times the UK population, but that US road deaths figure is more than 25 times the UK one. Of course, the nature of UK city centres and geographic size means that there is bound to be more travelling by car in the US in the first place. But at least part of the difference has to be a different emphasis on road safety in the UK compared to the US.

lm28469 3y ago
Distance driven per capita would be a better metric than population
- eesmith 3y ago
  Including the worked-out answer in your comment would also be better. Or see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-r... which lists those numbers for 2019 and points out that population is only one of several relevant comparison: per 100k per 100k per 1 billion inhabitants motor vehicles vehicle km per year per year ---------- -------- ---------- UK 2.9 5.7 3.8 (in 2010) USA 12.9 16.1 8.3 (in 2022)
  - quietbritishjim 3y ago
    This is probably the best we can reasonably do but even this doesn't show the whole picture. I think it makes it look like most (but not all) of the safety difference is due to much less distance driven in the UK. But, given identical attitudes and driving style, I would expect accidents per km to be much higher in the UK because more time is spent on much slower urban roads in town centres (perhaps not big city centres so much) and UK suburban (which is much higher density => smaller distance than US suburban). So the spatial density of opportunity for vehicle/pedrestrian collision is much greater. Perhaps per unit time spent driving would be closer, but still not there. But that's all to say, I think the UK numbers are better than the USA ones by an even larger factor than they appear.
    - eesmith 3y ago
      > This is probably the best we can reasonably do but even this doesn't show the whole picture. Well, the numbers I gave only concern "deaths by vehicles", not "accidents". ("Accident" is a misnomer as it's a marketing term used to normalize car collisions - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accident#Accidents_by_vehicle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accident#Accidents_by_vehicle .) The death rate increases with speed, and I think US policies encourage higher speeds than the UK. UK cars also tend to be smaller and lighter, which reduces the size of the blind spots and the fatality rate of collisions. We can surely do better than my stats as there are a lot of publications on this topic.
      - cmh89 3y ago
        The United States is also massive geographically and road policies and enforcement vary dramatically. New York State, which similiar to the UK in regards to one massive metropolis, several large cities, and then lots of rural areas, has 5.8 deaths per 100k. Mississippi, which even its big cities are completely car dominated has 26.2 deaths per 100k. It comes down to a lot of things. When less of your population is driving, you're going to have less death. Big city streets are usually congested which slows vehicle speeds which in turns reduces deaths, and its politically difficult to slow cars down in a car dependent culture, as most people want to speed. I'll also point out that for a lot of the south and midwest, you drive to the bar and you drive away from the bar. They make bars with 50+ parking spots and then say "Don't drive drunk!". https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/state-by-state https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/state...
        eesmith 3y ago
        Which serves to highlight buro9's original complaint in this thread: "The deaths by vehicles is astonishing" ... "Virtually no-one who owned the set of decisions that led to those deaths face any consequence of any kind... for ending someone's life." etc.
darkclouds 3y ago
> USA population is just under 5 times the UK population, but that US road deaths figure is more than 25 times the UK one. An ambulance in the UK is never more than 8 minutes away from you, an ambulance in the US can be miles from you. So when looking at the deaths metric, yes the US looks bad, but sometimes, you might be kept alive in the most horrific condition here in the UK. I've asked around the ambulance service to see if they have anything to identify the person and then decide if it would be nicer to be swiftly put out of my misery, sadly nothing exists. The default position to keep people alive hell or high water is order of the day! That's psychological torture the British govt is carrying out on me and there aint no law for that! I have certain metrics, that if they occurred, I'd like to be euthanised on the spot, but the govt via the NHS and ambulance service wants to carry on experimenting with me and millions more, like a preface to the story and film Terminator. When I watch Andy Murray walking onto centre court at Wimbledon lawn tennis club, I have the theme tune to Terminator[1] playing in my head, because I know he has an artificial hip. I also know how to avoid those and it costs less, than the GDP inducing cost of artificial joints. Still I'm sure the surgical process will be streamlined into a factory process and possibly even automated for the battle field to get those little soldiers back up and fighting fit as quickly as possible in the future. So is it any wonder Motability is the largest fleet provider in Europe, the largest buyer of cars in the UK, buying 10% of all cars on the road.[2] If they disappeared, do you think the country would hit all its transport targets for pollution and numbers on the road? Surprising how the taxpayer is used to fund its own problems dont you think? Do you think the British govt via Motability is lowering the bar for self driving cars here in the UK? [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRRmT5aBZzY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRRmT5aBZzY [2] https://www.transport.gov.scot/publication/motability-a-briefing-paper-on-value-for-money-by-the-mobility-and-access-committee-for-scotland-2022/#:~:text=Motability%20is%20the%20biggest%20fleet,of%20all%20new%20car%20sales https://www.transport.gov.scot/publication/motability-a-brie....
- ben_w 3y ago
  > I've asked around the ambulance service to see if they have anything to identify the person and then decide if it would be nicer to be swiftly put out of my misery, sadly nothing exists. The default position to keep people alive hell or high water is order of the day! Good. If I were in such an accident, I would want to be kept alive until such time as I could make decisions for myself; I absolutely do not want to be in a place where first responders are expected to decide for me while I'm unconscious. > like a preface to the story and film Terminator. ??? Edit: read the profile, can't tell if psychosis, Markov chain, or trolling.

lm28469 3y ago

Distance driven per capita would be a better metric than population

eesmith 3y ago
Including the worked-out answer in your comment would also be better. Or see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-r... which lists those numbers for 2019 and points out that population is only one of several relevant comparison: per 100k per 100k per 1 billion inhabitants motor vehicles vehicle km per year per year ---------- -------- ---------- UK 2.9 5.7 3.8 (in 2010) USA 12.9 16.1 8.3 (in 2022)
- quietbritishjim 3y ago
  This is probably the best we can reasonably do but even this doesn't show the whole picture. I think it makes it look like most (but not all) of the safety difference is due to much less distance driven in the UK. But, given identical attitudes and driving style, I would expect accidents per km to be much higher in the UK because more time is spent on much slower urban roads in town centres (perhaps not big city centres so much) and UK suburban (which is much higher density => smaller distance than US suburban). So the spatial density of opportunity for vehicle/pedrestrian collision is much greater. Perhaps per unit time spent driving would be closer, but still not there. But that's all to say, I think the UK numbers are better than the USA ones by an even larger factor than they appear.
  - eesmith 3y ago
    > This is probably the best we can reasonably do but even this doesn't show the whole picture. Well, the numbers I gave only concern "deaths by vehicles", not "accidents". ("Accident" is a misnomer as it's a marketing term used to normalize car collisions - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accident#Accidents_by_vehicle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accident#Accidents_by_vehicle .) The death rate increases with speed, and I think US policies encourage higher speeds than the UK. UK cars also tend to be smaller and lighter, which reduces the size of the blind spots and the fatality rate of collisions. We can surely do better than my stats as there are a lot of publications on this topic.
    - cmh89 3y ago
      The United States is also massive geographically and road policies and enforcement vary dramatically. New York State, which similiar to the UK in regards to one massive metropolis, several large cities, and then lots of rural areas, has 5.8 deaths per 100k. Mississippi, which even its big cities are completely car dominated has 26.2 deaths per 100k. It comes down to a lot of things. When less of your population is driving, you're going to have less death. Big city streets are usually congested which slows vehicle speeds which in turns reduces deaths, and its politically difficult to slow cars down in a car dependent culture, as most people want to speed. I'll also point out that for a lot of the south and midwest, you drive to the bar and you drive away from the bar. They make bars with 50+ parking spots and then say "Don't drive drunk!". https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/state-by-state https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/state...
      - eesmith 3y ago
        Which serves to highlight buro9's original complaint in this thread: "The deaths by vehicles is astonishing" ... "Virtually no-one who owned the set of decisions that led to those deaths face any consequence of any kind... for ending someone's life." etc.

darkclouds 3y ago

> USA population is just under 5 times the UK population, but that US road deaths figure is more than 25 times the UK one. An ambulance in the UK is never more than 8 minutes away from you, an ambulance in the US can be miles from you. So when looking at the deaths metric, yes the US looks bad, but sometimes, you might be kept alive in the most horrific condition here in the UK. I've asked around the ambulance service to see if they have anything to identify the person and then decide if it would be nicer to be swiftly put out of my misery, sadly nothing exists. The default position to keep people alive hell or high water is order of the day! That's psychological torture the British govt is carrying out on me and there aint no law for that! I have certain metrics, that if they occurred, I'd like to be euthanised on the spot, but the govt via the NHS and ambulance service wants to carry on experimenting with me and millions more, like a preface to the story and film Terminator. When I watch Andy Murray walking onto centre court at Wimbledon lawn tennis club, I have the theme tune to Terminator[1] playing in my head, because I know he has an artificial hip. I also know how to avoid those and it costs less, than the GDP inducing cost of artificial joints. Still I'm sure the surgical process will be streamlined into a factory process and possibly even automated for the battle field to get those little soldiers back up and fighting fit as quickly as possible in the future. So is it any wonder Motability is the largest fleet provider in Europe, the largest buyer of cars in the UK, buying 10% of all cars on the road.[2] If they disappeared, do you think the country would hit all its transport targets for pollution and numbers on the road? Surprising how the taxpayer is used to fund its own problems dont you think? Do you think the British govt via Motability is lowering the bar for self driving cars here in the UK? [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRRmT5aBZzY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRRmT5aBZzY [2] https://www.transport.gov.scot/publication/motability-a-briefing-paper-on-value-for-money-by-the-mobility-and-access-committee-for-scotland-2022/#:~:text=Motability%20is%20the%20biggest%20fleet,of%20all%20new%20car%20sales https://www.transport.gov.scot/publication/motability-a-brie....

ben_w 3y ago
> I've asked around the ambulance service to see if they have anything to identify the person and then decide if it would be nicer to be swiftly put out of my misery, sadly nothing exists. The default position to keep people alive hell or high water is order of the day! Good. If I were in such an accident, I would want to be kept alive until such time as I could make decisions for myself; I absolutely do not want to be in a place where first responders are expected to decide for me while I'm unconscious. > like a preface to the story and film Terminator. ??? Edit: read the profile, can't tell if psychosis, Markov chain, or trolling.