Point [1] is a good thing to watch for, but if you update the graphs, they do not change much. Point [2], traffic fatalities doubling in under 5 years does not

Point [1] is a good thing to watch for, but if you update the graphs, they do not change much. Point [2], traffic fatalities doubling in under 5 years does not need normalization. The population did not double in that time. Which is a way to say, go ahead and normalize the data, it stays the same. Point [3] is IMO your own bias and immaterial. The video raises the question, why has all of the progress of reducing pedestrian deaths of the last 30 years disappeared in the last 5? If that does not matter to you, it is your perogative. > video is narrative pushing social propaganda And exactly what is that narrative? Given you did not even finish watching the video, this statement seems to be entirely your assumption and bias. Streets are more dangerous for pedestrians, that is fact born out in statistics. Why that is the case is a question. The video does not prescribe too many solutions, and none are that we all should all stop driving. One suggestion is having more than 1 working street light for a row of 20 houses would make _that_ street safer. Wanting the city of LA to fix streetlights does not seem like propaganda. Which assertions did you think are propaganda, or did you stop watching in anticipation of that?