6 ms·

"licenses do need to be easy to get" This is what allows the situation we have. People either don't get caught, or only get caught after injury has occurred.

"licenses do need to be easy to get" This is what allows the situation we have. People either don't get caught, or only get caught after injury has occurred. "traffic violations should be punished way, way, way more severely than they are." It depends on the infection. Many are already severe, such as being arrested for racing, going 25+ over the limit, DUI, etc. DUI is a factor in about a 3rd of fatalities and is already punished severely. Seems like the punishment focus isn't working. The preemptive education portion is more promising.

acdha 3y ago
If education worked, we wouldn’t see stats going up contrary to the rest of the world. The problem is that enforcement has declined radically and drivers have learned that there will be basically no consequences for anything short of a fatality and often even then it’ll be minimal. One of the big problems is that the early signals are ignored: the guy saying the dead pedestrian “jumped in front” of his truck now almost always has a history of things like speeding and signal tickets, parking violations, etc. but as long as that doesn’t interfere with their ability to drive, they’re just being trained not to treat it seriously. What I’d like to see is a progressive escalation of natural consequences: more than one speeding or light ticket in a year and you can’t keep your license without showing that your car has a speed/acceleration governor installed, more than a few in a year and your license is suspended for a month, etc. The focus should not be on money but reinforcing the idea that driving is dangerous and if you refuse to be safe you will lose that privilege.
- giantg2 3y ago
  "If education worked, we wouldn’t see stats going up contrary to the rest of the world." This isn't really true. Most other developed nations have much stricter licensing with much lower fatality rates. Yes, enforcement is definitely an issue too. Progress penalties and fines tied to income levels (or vehicle values) would be a good start.
  - acdha 3y ago
    It is really true. There are various causes being debated but we’re the only rich country where the fatality rate is moving in the wrong direction: https://static01.nyt.com/images/2023/12/10/briefing/oakImage-1702214892119/oakImage-1702214892119-mobileMasterAt3x.png https://static01.nyt.com/images/2023/12/10/briefing/oakImage... The source article covers why some of the theories can’t explain the difference on their own: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/11/briefing/us-traffic-deaths.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/11/briefing/us-traffic-death...
    - giantg2 3y ago
      I can't read your pay walled article. "It is really true. There are various causes being debated but we’re the only rich country where the fatality rate is moving in the wrong direction:" I'm not sure we're on the same page with what I'm taking issue with. The requirements to get a license are a joke in the US. The other nations with lower fatalities have stricter licensing. Yes, it won't explain it on it's own, but it is highly correlated and supported by studies around stricter licensing in other nations and graduated licensing in the US. But your claim that if education worked the stats wouldn't be going up has no basis in anything you've posted. The overall licensing has not improved in the US. The jurisdictions in your chart have much stricter requirements.
      - acdha 3y ago
        The graph is not paywalled, and that’s really most of it. You can use IA for the rest: https://web.archive.org/web/20231211115919/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/11/briefing/us-traffic-deaths.html https://web.archive.org/web/20231211115919/https://www.nytim... The general point, however, is simple: neither the US nor our peer countries significantly changed licensing requirements in the last 10-20 years. We didn’t suddenly stop doing public safety campaigns, either, but the United States is the only country where the fatality rate suddenly started going back up. The licensing hypothesis could explain why our numbers are higher in absolute terms but not that stark, sudden increase in legality – even if we made the license exams much easier in the mid-2010s, that wouldn’t affect the majority of drivers who already had their licenses by then.
- seanmcdirmid 3y ago
  China has 10x the road traffic fatalities per capita than we do. People ask if China is safe, and...they never really look at traffic fatalities numbers which are way more significant than getting stabbed to death by some guy at a drum tower. Beijing is the only place I saw someone die before (bicycle ran a red light, taxi was speeding through the intersection at a yellow light, its weird how everything goes at slow motion at the point). I've actually had pedestrians jump in front of me before at green lights in North Seattle on Aurora, which is famous for traffic fatalities. In this case, the problem aren't bad drivers, but fentanyl. Sometimes the pedestrians really are at fault. Also, we design our streets like ass; e.g. encouraging pedestrian and car traffic at the same time along with ample pedestrian-obscuring on-street parking (you really can't have both!). In this case, yes, the cars need to do the right thing, but that's made difficult enough that tragedies occur way too often. We need to get the Dutch to teach us how its done.
  - giantg2 3y ago
    Pedestrian fatalities in the US involve alcohol about 50% of the time by at least one party. 38% of pedestrians killed have BACs over .08.
    - seanmcdirmid 3y ago
      I wonder if they have tracked fentanyl yet? It seems like the numbers would evolve just substituting one substance for another.
    - s1artibartfast 3y ago
      Similarly, 16% of pedestrian fatalities were on freeways. 59% were on non-freeway arterials, while 22% were on local streets. It seems like individual pedestrian can do quite a bit of risk mitigation by staying sober and out of traffic. These stats match my anecdotal experience where I have had numerous close calls as a driver due to pedestrians where they shouldn't be (eg people on the freeway), but no close calls while walking sober on Surface streets.
cooper_ganglia 3y ago
DUIs are not punished nearly severely enough. I used to work with an alcoholic who had been arrested multiple times, for all sorts of things: Fighting, property damage, indecent exposure, racing, going +100 MPH on a suspended license, etc. He was arrested for his 4th DUI and was upset because, according to him, he "got the book thrown at him". His sentence? 6 months in county jail, with 5 days per week of work leave. He only spent evenings and weekends at the jail. A few months in, he faked some letterhead for a landscaping company and sent a letter to the judge, claiming to be the company, saying they just hired him and they were requesting a 6th day of work leave. The judge allowed it, so now this guy would just leave jail on Saturday morning and hang out with his elderly parents all day. He saved money while in jail because he would work all week and then sleep at the jail, so he had no rent to pay. He was arrested for his FOURTH DUI, and came out financially better than when he went in. He was practically rewarded for it. In my opinion, a DUI should mean 5 years in prison with no possibility for a shortened sentence, your second DUI gets you 10 years, and your third is an instant life-sentence. I've had too many people in my life killed or paralyzed by inebriated drivers. I have literally not one single drop of empathy for anyone who drinks and then gets behind the wheel. In the case of an accident, I think it's actually immoral that they are provided any level of medical care at all. If they caused the injury or death of someone else on the road, leave them in the ditch to crawl out themselves. Let them take accountability for their actions, because obviously 6-months in county jail isn't fixing the problem.
- giantg2 3y ago
  Some states are more strict than other. That seems extremely lenient. They are generally misdemeanors or felonies that would cause many people to lose their jobs. Your part about faking work release is really a separate issue - did you report them? Most states will not issue you a license if you have multiple DUIs. So he should have been on a suspended license, which should have drastically increased the penalty in most states. It seems the judge may have been ignoring sentencing guidelines if it was so lenient.
  - cooper_ganglia 3y ago
    When he was arrested for his 4th DUI, his license had been suspended. Because of this, his dad bought him a car so he could get around (doesn't make sense to me either, haha). So he had a suspended license, no insurance, he was drunk, and driving 100+ MPH down an empty country road when he was arrested. I know all this because I bought his car from his mom, and I'd drive him to work from the jail on Mondays and Tuesdays and he'd complain about how unfair his life was. But therein lies the problem. It shouldn't be up to a judge's opinion on how much time someone with a DUI should receive. Just make it a flat 5-year sentence across the board so we don't have to worry about how the judge felt that day. I don't see the work release issue as a separate issue. People with DUIs should have no single recourse of action to leave state custody until their sentencing is complete. You've proven you're a danger to society, it would be irresponsible to toss you right back in. There should be no work release, no reduced sentence, nothing like that. If you voluntarily risk the lives of others on the road, you give up 5 years of your own life if you're caught. I think that's exceedingly fair.
torstenvl 3y ago
Going 15mph over is a crime in a lot of states (like NC), which is bonkers. By contrast, DUI is not nearly severe enough. It should only be a misdemeanor if it's <= .10. Anything over .10 should be a felony.
- giantg2 3y ago
  In my mind, just increasing penalties will have little effect (except excluding more people from society adding an overall drag). They need to do better at educating to avoid it.
  - ethanbond 3y ago
    What on earth does "educating" mean in this context? Do people not know how to read a speedometer? Do they not know how to read a speed limit sign?
    - giantg2 3y ago
      I'm talking mostly about DUI. But yes, even with speed limits. A stricter licensing program with better education could fix a lot of the issues. Most people don't understand vehicle dynamics. If they had some basic understanding about stuff like 2x speed is 4x stopping distance, it might wake them up. Most drivers do risky things without realizing they are risky because they are so ignorant, even when following the speed limit. Many other developed nations have lower fatalities and stricter licensing (even when speeds are unrestricted like the autobahn).

acdha 3y ago

If education worked, we wouldn’t see stats going up contrary to the rest of the world. The problem is that enforcement has declined radically and drivers have learned that there will be basically no consequences for anything short of a fatality and often even then it’ll be minimal. One of the big problems is that the early signals are ignored: the guy saying the dead pedestrian “jumped in front” of his truck now almost always has a history of things like speeding and signal tickets, parking violations, etc. but as long as that doesn’t interfere with their ability to drive, they’re just being trained not to treat it seriously. What I’d like to see is a progressive escalation of natural consequences: more than one speeding or light ticket in a year and you can’t keep your license without showing that your car has a speed/acceleration governor installed, more than a few in a year and your license is suspended for a month, etc. The focus should not be on money but reinforcing the idea that driving is dangerous and if you refuse to be safe you will lose that privilege.

giantg2 3y ago
"If education worked, we wouldn’t see stats going up contrary to the rest of the world." This isn't really true. Most other developed nations have much stricter licensing with much lower fatality rates. Yes, enforcement is definitely an issue too. Progress penalties and fines tied to income levels (or vehicle values) would be a good start.
- acdha 3y ago
  It is really true. There are various causes being debated but we’re the only rich country where the fatality rate is moving in the wrong direction: https://static01.nyt.com/images/2023/12/10/briefing/oakImage-1702214892119/oakImage-1702214892119-mobileMasterAt3x.png https://static01.nyt.com/images/2023/12/10/briefing/oakImage... The source article covers why some of the theories can’t explain the difference on their own: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/11/briefing/us-traffic-deaths.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/11/briefing/us-traffic-death...
  - giantg2 3y ago
    I can't read your pay walled article. "It is really true. There are various causes being debated but we’re the only rich country where the fatality rate is moving in the wrong direction:" I'm not sure we're on the same page with what I'm taking issue with. The requirements to get a license are a joke in the US. The other nations with lower fatalities have stricter licensing. Yes, it won't explain it on it's own, but it is highly correlated and supported by studies around stricter licensing in other nations and graduated licensing in the US. But your claim that if education worked the stats wouldn't be going up has no basis in anything you've posted. The overall licensing has not improved in the US. The jurisdictions in your chart have much stricter requirements.
    - acdha 3y ago
      The graph is not paywalled, and that’s really most of it. You can use IA for the rest: https://web.archive.org/web/20231211115919/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/11/briefing/us-traffic-deaths.html https://web.archive.org/web/20231211115919/https://www.nytim... The general point, however, is simple: neither the US nor our peer countries significantly changed licensing requirements in the last 10-20 years. We didn’t suddenly stop doing public safety campaigns, either, but the United States is the only country where the fatality rate suddenly started going back up. The licensing hypothesis could explain why our numbers are higher in absolute terms but not that stark, sudden increase in legality – even if we made the license exams much easier in the mid-2010s, that wouldn’t affect the majority of drivers who already had their licenses by then.
seanmcdirmid 3y ago
China has 10x the road traffic fatalities per capita than we do. People ask if China is safe, and...they never really look at traffic fatalities numbers which are way more significant than getting stabbed to death by some guy at a drum tower. Beijing is the only place I saw someone die before (bicycle ran a red light, taxi was speeding through the intersection at a yellow light, its weird how everything goes at slow motion at the point). I've actually had pedestrians jump in front of me before at green lights in North Seattle on Aurora, which is famous for traffic fatalities. In this case, the problem aren't bad drivers, but fentanyl. Sometimes the pedestrians really are at fault. Also, we design our streets like ass; e.g. encouraging pedestrian and car traffic at the same time along with ample pedestrian-obscuring on-street parking (you really can't have both!). In this case, yes, the cars need to do the right thing, but that's made difficult enough that tragedies occur way too often. We need to get the Dutch to teach us how its done.
- giantg2 3y ago
  Pedestrian fatalities in the US involve alcohol about 50% of the time by at least one party. 38% of pedestrians killed have BACs over .08.
  - seanmcdirmid 3y ago
    I wonder if they have tracked fentanyl yet? It seems like the numbers would evolve just substituting one substance for another.
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    Similarly, 16% of pedestrian fatalities were on freeways. 59% were on non-freeway arterials, while 22% were on local streets. It seems like individual pedestrian can do quite a bit of risk mitigation by staying sober and out of traffic. These stats match my anecdotal experience where I have had numerous close calls as a driver due to pedestrians where they shouldn't be (eg people on the freeway), but no close calls while walking sober on Surface streets.

cooper_ganglia 3y ago

DUIs are not punished nearly severely enough. I used to work with an alcoholic who had been arrested multiple times, for all sorts of things: Fighting, property damage, indecent exposure, racing, going +100 MPH on a suspended license, etc. He was arrested for his 4th DUI and was upset because, according to him, he "got the book thrown at him". His sentence? 6 months in county jail, with 5 days per week of work leave. He only spent evenings and weekends at the jail. A few months in, he faked some letterhead for a landscaping company and sent a letter to the judge, claiming to be the company, saying they just hired him and they were requesting a 6th day of work leave. The judge allowed it, so now this guy would just leave jail on Saturday morning and hang out with his elderly parents all day. He saved money while in jail because he would work all week and then sleep at the jail, so he had no rent to pay. He was arrested for his FOURTH DUI, and came out financially better than when he went in. He was practically rewarded for it. In my opinion, a DUI should mean 5 years in prison with no possibility for a shortened sentence, your second DUI gets you 10 years, and your third is an instant life-sentence. I've had too many people in my life killed or paralyzed by inebriated drivers. I have literally not one single drop of empathy for anyone who drinks and then gets behind the wheel. In the case of an accident, I think it's actually immoral that they are provided any level of medical care at all. If they caused the injury or death of someone else on the road, leave them in the ditch to crawl out themselves. Let them take accountability for their actions, because obviously 6-months in county jail isn't fixing the problem.

giantg2 3y ago
Some states are more strict than other. That seems extremely lenient. They are generally misdemeanors or felonies that would cause many people to lose their jobs. Your part about faking work release is really a separate issue - did you report them? Most states will not issue you a license if you have multiple DUIs. So he should have been on a suspended license, which should have drastically increased the penalty in most states. It seems the judge may have been ignoring sentencing guidelines if it was so lenient.
- cooper_ganglia 3y ago
  When he was arrested for his 4th DUI, his license had been suspended. Because of this, his dad bought him a car so he could get around (doesn't make sense to me either, haha). So he had a suspended license, no insurance, he was drunk, and driving 100+ MPH down an empty country road when he was arrested. I know all this because I bought his car from his mom, and I'd drive him to work from the jail on Mondays and Tuesdays and he'd complain about how unfair his life was. But therein lies the problem. It shouldn't be up to a judge's opinion on how much time someone with a DUI should receive. Just make it a flat 5-year sentence across the board so we don't have to worry about how the judge felt that day. I don't see the work release issue as a separate issue. People with DUIs should have no single recourse of action to leave state custody until their sentencing is complete. You've proven you're a danger to society, it would be irresponsible to toss you right back in. There should be no work release, no reduced sentence, nothing like that. If you voluntarily risk the lives of others on the road, you give up 5 years of your own life if you're caught. I think that's exceedingly fair.

torstenvl 3y ago

Going 15mph over is a crime in a lot of states (like NC), which is bonkers. By contrast, DUI is not nearly severe enough. It should only be a misdemeanor if it's <= .10. Anything over .10 should be a felony.

giantg2 3y ago
In my mind, just increasing penalties will have little effect (except excluding more people from society adding an overall drag). They need to do better at educating to avoid it.
- ethanbond 3y ago
  What on earth does "educating" mean in this context? Do people not know how to read a speedometer? Do they not know how to read a speed limit sign?
  - giantg2 3y ago
    I'm talking mostly about DUI. But yes, even with speed limits. A stricter licensing program with better education could fix a lot of the issues. Most people don't understand vehicle dynamics. If they had some basic understanding about stuff like 2x speed is 4x stopping distance, it might wake them up. Most drivers do risky things without realizing they are risky because they are so ignorant, even when following the speed limit. Many other developed nations have lower fatalities and stricter licensing (even when speeds are unrestricted like the autobahn).