7 ms·

So cars are roughly 10 times safer than riding horses? And that's without accounting for the difference in distance travelled. The number of injuries for the ca

So cars are roughly 10 times safer than riding horses? And that's without accounting for the difference in distance travelled. The number of injuries for the car are staggeringly high because of how common they are. I bet if we enacted policies that made owning a horse as likely as owning a car, we would also find that every minutes a several horse riders get injured.

pixl97 3y ago
I would also make a guess that cars operated at the same speed (with current safety equipment) that cars would be closer to 100 times safer than horses. The entire velocity squared multiples quickly.
- thmsths 3y ago
  I think so too. Motorcycles are the closest thing we have to a very fast horse and according to [1] they are 35 times more likely to result in a fatal crash than a car. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorcycle_safety https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorcycle_safety
- hgomersall 3y ago
  It's complicated the other way because we design our environment to be safe for cars; horses on the other hand tend to go everywhere, including jumping over stuff.
A_D_E_P_T 3y ago
> So cars are roughly 10 times safer than riding horses? Well, all of that refers to injury -- which may be serious, but may also be very mild. A sprained ankle is an injury. Horseback riding is a lot like a contact sport; it's very easy to pick up musculoskeletal injuries from getting pulled or thrown (or kicked, which has also happened to me once,) but only a very small proportion of those lead to serious and lasting disability. If we look solely at fatalities, a different picture might emerge. Automobile injuries are, I surmise, more likely to be very serious or fatal. And, of course, motorcycles are in a different plane of existence entirely.
- zarzavat 3y ago
  The problem with horses is that you tend to fall on your back from a moderate height, which makes them very good at causing paralysis.
  - lazide 3y ago
    Also, even the sketchiest car is far more predictable than a cranky or barn sour horse.
    - hutzlibu 3y ago
      I had a brake failure once (which did not caused damage due to luck and reaction). It was a old car, but it was checked before.
      - lazide 3y ago
        That’s pretty hard to do. Out of curiosity - how old, and how did the brakes fail?
        hutzlibu 3y ago
        20 years old and the break strings(?) just snapped. I suppose the mechanic did a sloppy job before (never went there again). It was flat where it happened, but we have mamy quite steep roads here as well. So could have ended badly. (So it was just a allmost crash)
    - AlbertCory 3y ago
      By contrast, the sketchiest horse will avoid collisions with other horses.
      - defrost 3y ago
        For the record, the sketchiest horse will suddenly kick out hard at the head height of a 12 year old if they approach it 'wrong' (that's a dice roll). Horses are more dangerous than you might credit them to be.
AlbertCory 3y ago
the denominator is clearly the big question. Is it "miles traveled" or "time spent doing it"? or in practical terms: "what's the likelihood you'll be injured if you do it every day"?
- lazide 3y ago
  Much, much higher for the horse. Horses are far less predictable, temperamental, harder to manage and keep healthy, etc. And more than powerful enough to kick someone in the head and end them in an instant if they really wanted to.
  - AlbertCory 3y ago
    although they will avoid colliding with other horses, AFAIK
    - lazide 3y ago
      Cars will also avoid eating random things and pooping in public, thankfully!
      - AlbertCory 3y ago
        I see a YouTube video here! $$$$$$
- thmsths 3y ago
  We can also look at which is the most dangerous to pedestrians (probably the car by a wide margin), or even which is the most dangerous when not ridden/in use. For that last point I would expect the horse to be the most dangerous, while you have the occasional death due to being crushed by a car I bet stable accidents are more frequent.
  - AlbertCory 3y ago
    Good point on pedestrians. Cars can roll down hills, although that's probably infrequent. They can also catch fire. I'm not even horse-experienced, so my knowledge is mainly from TV.

pixl97 3y ago

I would also make a guess that cars operated at the same speed (with current safety equipment) that cars would be closer to 100 times safer than horses. The entire velocity squared multiples quickly.

thmsths 3y ago
I think so too. Motorcycles are the closest thing we have to a very fast horse and according to [1] they are 35 times more likely to result in a fatal crash than a car. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorcycle_safety https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorcycle_safety
hgomersall 3y ago
It's complicated the other way because we design our environment to be safe for cars; horses on the other hand tend to go everywhere, including jumping over stuff.

A_D_E_P_T 3y ago

> So cars are roughly 10 times safer than riding horses? Well, all of that refers to injury -- which may be serious, but may also be very mild. A sprained ankle is an injury. Horseback riding is a lot like a contact sport; it's very easy to pick up musculoskeletal injuries from getting pulled or thrown (or kicked, which has also happened to me once,) but only a very small proportion of those lead to serious and lasting disability. If we look solely at fatalities, a different picture might emerge. Automobile injuries are, I surmise, more likely to be very serious or fatal. And, of course, motorcycles are in a different plane of existence entirely.

zarzavat 3y ago
The problem with horses is that you tend to fall on your back from a moderate height, which makes them very good at causing paralysis.
- lazide 3y ago
  Also, even the sketchiest car is far more predictable than a cranky or barn sour horse.
  - hutzlibu 3y ago
    I had a brake failure once (which did not caused damage due to luck and reaction). It was a old car, but it was checked before.
    - lazide 3y ago
      That’s pretty hard to do. Out of curiosity - how old, and how did the brakes fail?
      - hutzlibu 3y ago
        20 years old and the break strings(?) just snapped. I suppose the mechanic did a sloppy job before (never went there again). It was flat where it happened, but we have mamy quite steep roads here as well. So could have ended badly. (So it was just a allmost crash)
  - AlbertCory 3y ago
    By contrast, the sketchiest horse will avoid collisions with other horses.
    - defrost 3y ago
      For the record, the sketchiest horse will suddenly kick out hard at the head height of a 12 year old if they approach it 'wrong' (that's a dice roll). Horses are more dangerous than you might credit them to be.

AlbertCory 3y ago

the denominator is clearly the big question. Is it "miles traveled" or "time spent doing it"? or in practical terms: "what's the likelihood you'll be injured if you do it every day"?

lazide 3y ago
Much, much higher for the horse. Horses are far less predictable, temperamental, harder to manage and keep healthy, etc. And more than powerful enough to kick someone in the head and end them in an instant if they really wanted to.
- AlbertCory 3y ago
  although they will avoid colliding with other horses, AFAIK
  - lazide 3y ago
    Cars will also avoid eating random things and pooping in public, thankfully!
    - AlbertCory 3y ago
      I see a YouTube video here! $$$$$$
thmsths 3y ago
We can also look at which is the most dangerous to pedestrians (probably the car by a wide margin), or even which is the most dangerous when not ridden/in use. For that last point I would expect the horse to be the most dangerous, while you have the occasional death due to being crushed by a car I bet stable accidents are more frequent.
- AlbertCory 3y ago
  Good point on pedestrians. Cars can roll down hills, although that's probably infrequent. They can also catch fire. I'm not even horse-experienced, so my knowledge is mainly from TV.