11 ms·

I'm much more worried about the road to the playground than the risks on the playground themselves. Below 18, about 3/8 of the deaths are from traffic. I grew

I'm much more worried about the road to the playground than the risks on the playground themselves. Below 18, about 3/8 of the deaths are from traffic. I grew up in 80's the time where almost everybody played in parks and fields. But I can't give that to my own son of 7. He has to cross 3 streets to reach a playground 200m from here,the worst of the crossings a street with 50km/h limitsand 1 car every 10 seconds. Not much, except just enough people drive like idiots, 90km/h or more on a road not even 500m long. We've been teaching him good pedestrian behaviour since he could walk. We've done a few tests where he walked to the baker, thinking he was unsupervised. He probably can do it most of the time. Except, 1 distraction while an idiot drives by will kill him. So I bring him to the playground and let him play as unsupervised as possible for an adult on the side of a playground. Of course, he knows I am there. I start working with him with more dangerous tools like a soldering iron. He can deal well enough with these risks. But not the streets.

MomoXenosaga 3y ago
I won't ride a bicycle in the UK because the British despise anything that isn't a car. People will literally cheer if a cyclist is mowed down.
- paulryanrogers 3y ago
  That sounds horrific. When I biked a lot recently the worst I got was a water bottle thrown at me and shouts intended to startle me to fall down
- bowsamic 3y ago
  You're being downvoted but I've observed this behaviour. I had a colleague who had multiple dash cams because truck drivers kept trying to drive him over when passing. They thought it was hilarious, they don't seem to care about whether or not the person will be killed. I was shocked coming to Germany and seeing cyclists not constantly being attacked by the general public. In the UK it's seen as totally illegitimate.
spacebacon 3y ago
Meanwhile the Yanomami tribes children are climbing 100 foot trees on their own.
abricq 3y ago
Probably, the predominance of cars in our modern societies (and cars always getting bigger) is one of the factor that yielded to observations made in this article. But in some places (for instance where I live, Lausanne Switzerland) it's becoming easier to escape this car culture. I don't have kids, but some colleagues do. One of them does not own a car and her 2 children (6 and 9 years old) do everything by bike : going to school, to the activities (they climb!), etc. They surely look much more agile and risky than other colleague's children. It's quite crazy to see these two kids on their bikes, and how much liberating it is for them to move by theirselves. Unlike most kids who just commute in their parents's car. Of course, I am aware this works only because there's a really good bike infrastructure. And people drive pretty well too, I guess.
- Biganon 3y ago
  Funny to see another Lausannois here, cheers
- CalRobert 3y ago
  I'm looking at moving to bloommerwede.nl, or maybe houte, in the Netherlands, so my kids can have this. I wish it were easier to find.
  - ab71e5 3y ago
    You don't need to move to these specific places in the Netherlands, in pretty much any city/suburb or town over ~3000 or something people you will have everything you need within safe biking distance, including a train or bus station to get around further.
    - CalRobert 3y ago
      Well, I live in Hilversum now, and _for me_ it's nice, I can bike or use public transport for everything. For _my kids_ it's... OK, but there are too many busy roads with fast traffic that they would need to cross to get to the closest playground, their school, etc.. Also quite a few large SUV's and big trucks. My kids are 6 and 4 though. Hilversum is the nicest place I've ever lived for biking and walking, but it's still not as good as Houten, parts of Utrecht, etc.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
xandrius 3y ago
That's why I personally cannot fathom living (and having a family) in a large town/city. I grew up in a village and I felt like I owned it, a few roads of course but they had to careful, not us. I believe that sort of mentality helps a lot in feeling connected with a place and not just a foreign object who has to take armored vehicles (e.g. Cars) to move from point to point.
- anon291 3y ago
  I mean... I live in a dense neighborhood in a city, and since you know everyone, the feeling of 'owning the place' still exists. We're lucky to be an older neighborhood (for the area), thus we have smaller roads, which are easy to navigate for kids. I think the main issue is (1) do you trust your neighbors, (2) are the streets safe (i.e., small), and (3) can you not be an anxious wreck.
CerealFounder 3y ago
With all do respect the numbers do not back this up. There were less than 200 of these types of deaths in 2021 according NHTSA and thats with a massive increase in cards from the 80s. Almost all danger for children has reduced since that time across all economics groups. The pressure from parents on other parents has made it so we dont trust children to handle risks that are pretty manageable.
- paulryanrogers 3y ago
  Kids don't walk and bike like they used to. I used to walk alone to visit neighbors on other blocks when I was 5yo in the 80s. Before owning a computer I'd walk or bike to play outside every day it wasn't snowing. And sometimes even then.
  - bombcar 3y ago
    I've seen children on the sidewalk, and so it should be possible to get a corrected "deaths-per-sidewalk-mile" if someone wants to do the work. I suspect that overall deaths are down, even if simply because overall total percentage of travel that is on freeway (controlled-access) is up.
oven9342 3y ago
In my town, the commune has built a children's cage at the other side of a not-so-busy road, where cars are thus invited to speed. Thanks to the safety of their cage, cars can roam in freedom without having to worry about needlessly interferences. I have been lately despising every kind of caged playground, where children might find fun in a sandbox.
- tetromino_ 3y ago
  In my experience in NYC, a playground without a fence and gate means a playground used as a track by teenagers on motorcycles and e-scooters (the sit down kind).
partitioned 3y ago
[flagged]
- oblio 3y ago
  I'm confused, what do you mean?
mycologos 3y ago
The Economist had an interesting recent article suggesting that, at least in America, part of the problem is that car insurance is way too cheap, so owning a car and driving like a moron is too easy: https://www.economist.com/united-states/2024/01/18/why-car-insurance-in-america-is-actually-too-cheap https://www.economist.com/united-states/2024/01/18/why-car-i.... > According to the Insurance Research Council (irc), an industry data group, 29% of claims nationally (and over 50% in several states) involve people insured at the state minimums [in the tens of thousands of dollars]. Few policies go beyond a few hundred thousand dollars of liability. The cost of a serious crash “is never going to be covered by that”, says Dale Porfilio, of the irc. By contrast, in Germany drivers are required to have €7.5m ($8.2m) of bodily-injury coverage, and in Britain liability is unlimited. I don't have a car, but I acknowledge that most Americans live in places where not having a car would make their lives much harder. Still, it seems reasonable for me to raise insurance requirements on enormous SUVs. They're 50-100% more dangerous to pedestrians, so this would reflect a higher actual cost inflicted on other people. If you don't want to pay that cost, and you still need the transportation of a personal car, buy the smaller and less dangerous vehicle.
- o_1 3y ago
  SUVs are not the problem. it's literally what the article said, mininums are too low. Most SUVs are family's traveling. You should look up the statistics for uninsured motorists in Florida, it's staggering. People simply will not follow the law, it's an enforcement problem. The sheer miles of roadways to police is extremely vast, it's very difficult to remove dangerous uninsured drivers. Hence why most people by big SUVs to protect themselves from collisions.
  - cognaitiv 3y ago
    Research indicates that SUVs are indeed more dangerous to pedestrians compared to other vehicle types in the United States. A study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) highlighted that late-model SUVs are more likely to cause fatalities to pedestrians than cars. This is attributed to the higher front profile of SUVs, which tends to result in more severe injuries upon impact. The study found that at speeds greater than 19 mph, SUVs caused more serious injuries and were more likely to result in pedestrian fatalities compared to cars. Specifically, at speeds of 20-39 mph, 30% of crashes with SUVs resulted in pedestrian fatalities, compared to 23% for cars. At speeds of 40 mph and above, all crashes with SUVs resulted in pedestrian fatalities, compared to 54% with cars. This indicates a significant increase in the risk posed by SUVs at higher speeds[0]. Further research supports these findings, showing that trucks and SUVs with hood heights greater than 40 inches are about 45% more likely to cause fatalities in pedestrian crashes than shorter vehicles with sloped hoods. The study, also by the IIHS, used data from nearly 18,000 crashes and noted that tall, squared-up hoods, characteristic of many best-selling SUVs and trucks, contribute significantly to the risk. The number of pedestrian deaths has significantly increased, with pedestrian fatalities jumping 13% to 7,342 in 2021, marking the highest number since 1981. This rise in pedestrian deaths has outpaced the increase in overall U.S. traffic deaths, highlighting a growing crisis in road safety related to larger vehicles[1]. These findings underscore the need for vehicle design changes to improve pedestrian safety, particularly as the proportion of SUVs on U.S. roads continues to rise. Despite advancements in vehicle safety that have reduced overall motor vehicle crash fatalities, the increased lethality of SUVs to pedestrians poses a significant challenge that requires attention from both manufacturers and regulatory bodies. [0] https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/new-study-suggests-todays-suvs-are-more-lethal-to-pedestrians-than-cars https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/new-study-suggests-todays-s... [1] https://www.reuters.com/world/us/tall-trucks-suvs-are-45-deadlier-us-pedestrians-study-shows-2023-11-14/ https://www.reuters.com/world/us/tall-trucks-suvs-are-45-dea... (ChatGPT 4)
bongodongobob 3y ago
It's a few thousand deaths per year for traffic. Kids need to be careful around streets but your fear is exaggerated.
- AdamN 3y ago
  I'm pretty sure car deaths are the number 1 preventable cause of death of children - doesn't seem like an exaggerated fear. Step 1 is to reduce speed limit to 45kph (25mph) anywhere a pedestrian could interact with the road which is what Vision Zero recommends.
  - bongodongobob 3y ago
    That's true but the number is exceedingly small. 4000 deaths / a couple hundred million is pretty much as good as it's going to get. That's just what happens with really big numbers. Edit: and that's car accidents, not pedestrian accidents which is also a fraction of that 4k.
    - paulryanrogers 3y ago
      Keep in mind there are fewer kids walking and biking.
      - bongodongobob 3y ago
        Ok multiply it by 10 and it's still ~1000 deaths. 100 / 100 million kids or whatever it is is pretty goddamn safe. You'd need to turn every road into a tunnel with gates to bring that number down.
  - pc86 3y ago
    The top reply the the top comment shows exactly why this "the number 1 preventable cause of death" nonsense doesn't actually line up with reality. Traffic deaths decrease while population is increasing, street are demonstrably safer for children than they ever have been. Barely 100 deaths for 330+ million people in the US, likely even less in less car-centric cultures.
safety1st 3y ago
It seems that US motor vehicle deaths per 100K pop are down by about 50% from where they were in the 1980s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in...
- CalRobert 3y ago
  Yes, cars have become much safer for the occupants. Also, far, far fewer people (especially kids) are walking and biking, so drivers have fewer chances to kill them. It's remarkable that pedestrian fatalities have gone up dramatically - now at the highest levels since the 1980's - _despite_ far, far fewer people walking to get around. For instance https://walkbiketoschool.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Final_WBTSresearch_2021.pdf https://walkbiketoschool.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Fina... """ ▪ In 1969, 48 percent of students in grades K through eight (ages 5 through 14) walked or bicycled to school.1 ▪ In 2009, only 13 percent of students in grades K through eight walked or bicycled to school. """
sandworm101 3y ago
>> Below 18, about 3/8 of the deaths are from traffic. The problem with statements like this is that they hide actual risk. The reality is that child road deaths are dramatically down, in line with all road deaths. Roads in the 1970s were basically warzones by today's standards. The fact that 3/8 of deaths occur there today is because we have come so far in decreasing all the other sources of early death. US child pedestrian deaths 1975: 1632. US child pedestrian deaths 2019: 138. https://seriousaccidents.com/blog/children-traffic-fatalities-by-year/ https://seriousaccidents.com/blog/children-traffic-fatalitie... I had a prof once joke that they worst thing anyone could do in the fight against heart disease would be to cure cancer: By taking cancer out of the picture, the percentage of deaths from heart disease would skyrocket. But exactly that has happened to children in recent years. Childhood cancer is no longer a death sentence, so too innumerable other conditions. And when kids do get sick they live long enough not to die as kids. So the smaller and smaller number of child road deaths each year ironically now represents a greater and greater percentage of total child deaths. The reality is that kids today are safer crossing the road than ever before. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a756524ed915d6faf2b2a56/child-casualties-2013-data.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a756524ed915... UK Child death/injury in 1979: 12,458. UK Child death/injury in 2013: 1,980. And that is despite roads now being massive more crowded and full of larger vehicles. The total population has also increased by at least 50% since the 70s, making the reduction in net traffic deaths even more dramatic.
- jacobolus 3y ago
  > US child pedestrian deaths 1975: 1632. US child pedestrian deaths 2019: 138. Does this reflect safer streets, or just fewer (esp. unsupervised) child pedestrians?
  - 1970-01-01 3y ago
    It's fewer children in the streets. Sorry, my firsthand observations are my source. (anecdotal evidence)
    - moi2388 3y ago
alistairSH 3y ago
I grew up in 80's the time where almost everybody played in parks and fields. But I can't give that to my own son of 7. I realize it's not possible for everybody, but there are areas where this is still possible. Even in the suburbs. My current "town" - Reston, VA - is like this. I can walk to all three schools (~1 mile), two lakes (~2 miles), a shopping center (~1 mile), community center (~1 mile), ball fields (~0.5 miles), and miles of wooded trails without crossing a single street at grade (we have pedestrian tunnels). And you can buy a decent TH for ~$600k (that's "affordable" for DC metro). It always amazes me that people willingly choose newer/bigger homes with crap infrastructure for families to live locally over older/smaller homes where the QOL is, by my measure, so much higher.
- mattgreenrocks 3y ago
  Hello fellow Restonite! Reston is a gem. It's not perfect by any means, but it was intentionally designed to be something other than unmitigated suburban sprawl. And it helps a lot. There's still a big reliance on cars to get around, but the wide availability of trails is fantastic.
  - alistairSH 3y ago
    And it definitely varies based on which side of Reston you're in. Being bisected by the Toll Road has some advantages, but really limits the ability to fully link (by foot or pedal) the entire area.
    - mattgreenrocks 3y ago
      If only the briefly-proposed casino could've brought us together!
      - alistairSH 3y ago
        They can have the casino if we can keep the golf courses.
- bluGill 3y ago
e40 3y ago
For 25 years I walked to work. The number of times, in a crosswalk, I had to jump out of the way to avoid serious injury or death could not be counted on my fingers and toes. And I was hyper-aware of vehicles (I include bicycles in that, because many times I had to avoid them, too). Now, I'm in a city (in the Bay Area) and I was walking from a residential area into the city (2-3 miles one way). Still, you would not expect lawful crossing of a street to be so dangerous.
downWidOutaFite 3y ago
The kid can handle it. In the 80s at 8 year old I would travel all over town on bikes and buses. The streets are safer now than they were back then.

MomoXenosaga 3y ago

I won't ride a bicycle in the UK because the British despise anything that isn't a car. People will literally cheer if a cyclist is mowed down.

paulryanrogers 3y ago
That sounds horrific. When I biked a lot recently the worst I got was a water bottle thrown at me and shouts intended to startle me to fall down
bowsamic 3y ago
You're being downvoted but I've observed this behaviour. I had a colleague who had multiple dash cams because truck drivers kept trying to drive him over when passing. They thought it was hilarious, they don't seem to care about whether or not the person will be killed. I was shocked coming to Germany and seeing cyclists not constantly being attacked by the general public. In the UK it's seen as totally illegitimate.

spacebacon 3y ago

Meanwhile the Yanomami tribes children are climbing 100 foot trees on their own.

abricq 3y ago

Probably, the predominance of cars in our modern societies (and cars always getting bigger) is one of the factor that yielded to observations made in this article. But in some places (for instance where I live, Lausanne Switzerland) it's becoming easier to escape this car culture. I don't have kids, but some colleagues do. One of them does not own a car and her 2 children (6 and 9 years old) do everything by bike : going to school, to the activities (they climb!), etc. They surely look much more agile and risky than other colleague's children. It's quite crazy to see these two kids on their bikes, and how much liberating it is for them to move by theirselves. Unlike most kids who just commute in their parents's car. Of course, I am aware this works only because there's a really good bike infrastructure. And people drive pretty well too, I guess.

Biganon 3y ago
Funny to see another Lausannois here, cheers
CalRobert 3y ago
I'm looking at moving to bloommerwede.nl, or maybe houte, in the Netherlands, so my kids can have this. I wish it were easier to find.
- ab71e5 3y ago
  You don't need to move to these specific places in the Netherlands, in pretty much any city/suburb or town over ~3000 or something people you will have everything you need within safe biking distance, including a train or bus station to get around further.
  - CalRobert 3y ago
    Well, I live in Hilversum now, and _for me_ it's nice, I can bike or use public transport for everything. For _my kids_ it's... OK, but there are too many busy roads with fast traffic that they would need to cross to get to the closest playground, their school, etc.. Also quite a few large SUV's and big trucks. My kids are 6 and 4 though. Hilversum is the nicest place I've ever lived for biking and walking, but it's still not as good as Houten, parts of Utrecht, etc.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

xandrius 3y ago

That's why I personally cannot fathom living (and having a family) in a large town/city. I grew up in a village and I felt like I owned it, a few roads of course but they had to careful, not us. I believe that sort of mentality helps a lot in feeling connected with a place and not just a foreign object who has to take armored vehicles (e.g. Cars) to move from point to point.

anon291 3y ago
I mean... I live in a dense neighborhood in a city, and since you know everyone, the feeling of 'owning the place' still exists. We're lucky to be an older neighborhood (for the area), thus we have smaller roads, which are easy to navigate for kids. I think the main issue is (1) do you trust your neighbors, (2) are the streets safe (i.e., small), and (3) can you not be an anxious wreck.

CerealFounder 3y ago

With all do respect the numbers do not back this up. There were less than 200 of these types of deaths in 2021 according NHTSA and thats with a massive increase in cards from the 80s. Almost all danger for children has reduced since that time across all economics groups. The pressure from parents on other parents has made it so we dont trust children to handle risks that are pretty manageable.

paulryanrogers 3y ago
Kids don't walk and bike like they used to. I used to walk alone to visit neighbors on other blocks when I was 5yo in the 80s. Before owning a computer I'd walk or bike to play outside every day it wasn't snowing. And sometimes even then.
- bombcar 3y ago
  I've seen children on the sidewalk, and so it should be possible to get a corrected "deaths-per-sidewalk-mile" if someone wants to do the work. I suspect that overall deaths are down, even if simply because overall total percentage of travel that is on freeway (controlled-access) is up.

oven9342 3y ago

In my town, the commune has built a children's cage at the other side of a not-so-busy road, where cars are thus invited to speed. Thanks to the safety of their cage, cars can roam in freedom without having to worry about needlessly interferences. I have been lately despising every kind of caged playground, where children might find fun in a sandbox.

tetromino_ 3y ago
In my experience in NYC, a playground without a fence and gate means a playground used as a track by teenagers on motorcycles and e-scooters (the sit down kind).

partitioned 3y ago

[flagged]

oblio 3y ago
I'm confused, what do you mean?

mycologos 3y ago

The Economist had an interesting recent article suggesting that, at least in America, part of the problem is that car insurance is way too cheap, so owning a car and driving like a moron is too easy: https://www.economist.com/united-states/2024/01/18/why-car-insurance-in-america-is-actually-too-cheap https://www.economist.com/united-states/2024/01/18/why-car-i.... > According to the Insurance Research Council (irc), an industry data group, 29% of claims nationally (and over 50% in several states) involve people insured at the state minimums [in the tens of thousands of dollars]. Few policies go beyond a few hundred thousand dollars of liability. The cost of a serious crash “is never going to be covered by that”, says Dale Porfilio, of the irc. By contrast, in Germany drivers are required to have €7.5m ($8.2m) of bodily-injury coverage, and in Britain liability is unlimited. I don't have a car, but I acknowledge that most Americans live in places where not having a car would make their lives much harder. Still, it seems reasonable for me to raise insurance requirements on enormous SUVs. They're 50-100% more dangerous to pedestrians, so this would reflect a higher actual cost inflicted on other people. If you don't want to pay that cost, and you still need the transportation of a personal car, buy the smaller and less dangerous vehicle.

o_1 3y ago
SUVs are not the problem. it's literally what the article said, mininums are too low. Most SUVs are family's traveling. You should look up the statistics for uninsured motorists in Florida, it's staggering. People simply will not follow the law, it's an enforcement problem. The sheer miles of roadways to police is extremely vast, it's very difficult to remove dangerous uninsured drivers. Hence why most people by big SUVs to protect themselves from collisions.
- cognaitiv 3y ago
  Research indicates that SUVs are indeed more dangerous to pedestrians compared to other vehicle types in the United States. A study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) highlighted that late-model SUVs are more likely to cause fatalities to pedestrians than cars. This is attributed to the higher front profile of SUVs, which tends to result in more severe injuries upon impact. The study found that at speeds greater than 19 mph, SUVs caused more serious injuries and were more likely to result in pedestrian fatalities compared to cars. Specifically, at speeds of 20-39 mph, 30% of crashes with SUVs resulted in pedestrian fatalities, compared to 23% for cars. At speeds of 40 mph and above, all crashes with SUVs resulted in pedestrian fatalities, compared to 54% with cars. This indicates a significant increase in the risk posed by SUVs at higher speeds[0]. Further research supports these findings, showing that trucks and SUVs with hood heights greater than 40 inches are about 45% more likely to cause fatalities in pedestrian crashes than shorter vehicles with sloped hoods. The study, also by the IIHS, used data from nearly 18,000 crashes and noted that tall, squared-up hoods, characteristic of many best-selling SUVs and trucks, contribute significantly to the risk. The number of pedestrian deaths has significantly increased, with pedestrian fatalities jumping 13% to 7,342 in 2021, marking the highest number since 1981. This rise in pedestrian deaths has outpaced the increase in overall U.S. traffic deaths, highlighting a growing crisis in road safety related to larger vehicles[1]. These findings underscore the need for vehicle design changes to improve pedestrian safety, particularly as the proportion of SUVs on U.S. roads continues to rise. Despite advancements in vehicle safety that have reduced overall motor vehicle crash fatalities, the increased lethality of SUVs to pedestrians poses a significant challenge that requires attention from both manufacturers and regulatory bodies. [0] https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/new-study-suggests-todays-suvs-are-more-lethal-to-pedestrians-than-cars https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/new-study-suggests-todays-s... [1] https://www.reuters.com/world/us/tall-trucks-suvs-are-45-deadlier-us-pedestrians-study-shows-2023-11-14/ https://www.reuters.com/world/us/tall-trucks-suvs-are-45-dea... (ChatGPT 4)

bongodongobob 3y ago

It's a few thousand deaths per year for traffic. Kids need to be careful around streets but your fear is exaggerated.

AdamN 3y ago
I'm pretty sure car deaths are the number 1 preventable cause of death of children - doesn't seem like an exaggerated fear. Step 1 is to reduce speed limit to 45kph (25mph) anywhere a pedestrian could interact with the road which is what Vision Zero recommends.
- bongodongobob 3y ago
  That's true but the number is exceedingly small. 4000 deaths / a couple hundred million is pretty much as good as it's going to get. That's just what happens with really big numbers. Edit: and that's car accidents, not pedestrian accidents which is also a fraction of that 4k.
  - paulryanrogers 3y ago
    Keep in mind there are fewer kids walking and biking.
    - bongodongobob 3y ago
      Ok multiply it by 10 and it's still ~1000 deaths. 100 / 100 million kids or whatever it is is pretty goddamn safe. You'd need to turn every road into a tunnel with gates to bring that number down.
- pc86 3y ago
  The top reply the the top comment shows exactly why this "the number 1 preventable cause of death" nonsense doesn't actually line up with reality. Traffic deaths decrease while population is increasing, street are demonstrably safer for children than they ever have been. Barely 100 deaths for 330+ million people in the US, likely even less in less car-centric cultures.

safety1st 3y ago

It seems that US motor vehicle deaths per 100K pop are down by about 50% from where they were in the 1980s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in...

CalRobert 3y ago
Yes, cars have become much safer for the occupants. Also, far, far fewer people (especially kids) are walking and biking, so drivers have fewer chances to kill them. It's remarkable that pedestrian fatalities have gone up dramatically - now at the highest levels since the 1980's - _despite_ far, far fewer people walking to get around. For instance https://walkbiketoschool.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Final_WBTSresearch_2021.pdf https://walkbiketoschool.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Fina... """ ▪ In 1969, 48 percent of students in grades K through eight (ages 5 through 14) walked or bicycled to school.1 ▪ In 2009, only 13 percent of students in grades K through eight walked or bicycled to school. """

sandworm101 3y ago

>> Below 18, about 3/8 of the deaths are from traffic. The problem with statements like this is that they hide actual risk. The reality is that child road deaths are dramatically down, in line with all road deaths. Roads in the 1970s were basically warzones by today's standards. The fact that 3/8 of deaths occur there today is because we have come so far in decreasing all the other sources of early death. US child pedestrian deaths 1975: 1632. US child pedestrian deaths 2019: 138. https://seriousaccidents.com/blog/children-traffic-fatalities-by-year/ https://seriousaccidents.com/blog/children-traffic-fatalitie... I had a prof once joke that they worst thing anyone could do in the fight against heart disease would be to cure cancer: By taking cancer out of the picture, the percentage of deaths from heart disease would skyrocket. But exactly that has happened to children in recent years. Childhood cancer is no longer a death sentence, so too innumerable other conditions. And when kids do get sick they live long enough not to die as kids. So the smaller and smaller number of child road deaths each year ironically now represents a greater and greater percentage of total child deaths. The reality is that kids today are safer crossing the road than ever before. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a756524ed915d6faf2b2a56/child-casualties-2013-data.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a756524ed915... UK Child death/injury in 1979: 12,458. UK Child death/injury in 2013: 1,980. And that is despite roads now being massive more crowded and full of larger vehicles. The total population has also increased by at least 50% since the 70s, making the reduction in net traffic deaths even more dramatic.

jacobolus 3y ago
> US child pedestrian deaths 1975: 1632. US child pedestrian deaths 2019: 138. Does this reflect safer streets, or just fewer (esp. unsupervised) child pedestrians?
- 1970-01-01 3y ago
  It's fewer children in the streets. Sorry, my firsthand observations are my source. (anecdotal evidence)
  - moi2388 3y ago

alistairSH 3y ago

I grew up in 80's the time where almost everybody played in parks and fields. But I can't give that to my own son of 7. I realize it's not possible for everybody, but there are areas where this is still possible. Even in the suburbs. My current "town" - Reston, VA - is like this. I can walk to all three schools (~1 mile), two lakes (~2 miles), a shopping center (~1 mile), community center (~1 mile), ball fields (~0.5 miles), and miles of wooded trails without crossing a single street at grade (we have pedestrian tunnels). And you can buy a decent TH for ~$600k (that's "affordable" for DC metro). It always amazes me that people willingly choose newer/bigger homes with crap infrastructure for families to live locally over older/smaller homes where the QOL is, by my measure, so much higher.

mattgreenrocks 3y ago
Hello fellow Restonite! Reston is a gem. It's not perfect by any means, but it was intentionally designed to be something other than unmitigated suburban sprawl. And it helps a lot. There's still a big reliance on cars to get around, but the wide availability of trails is fantastic.
- alistairSH 3y ago
  And it definitely varies based on which side of Reston you're in. Being bisected by the Toll Road has some advantages, but really limits the ability to fully link (by foot or pedal) the entire area.
  - mattgreenrocks 3y ago
    If only the briefly-proposed casino could've brought us together!
    - alistairSH 3y ago
      They can have the casino if we can keep the golf courses.
bluGill 3y ago

e40 3y ago

For 25 years I walked to work. The number of times, in a crosswalk, I had to jump out of the way to avoid serious injury or death could not be counted on my fingers and toes. And I was hyper-aware of vehicles (I include bicycles in that, because many times I had to avoid them, too). Now, I'm in a city (in the Bay Area) and I was walking from a residential area into the city (2-3 miles one way). Still, you would not expect lawful crossing of a street to be so dangerous.

downWidOutaFite 3y ago

The kid can handle it. In the 80s at 8 year old I would travel all over town on bikes and buses. The streets are safer now than they were back then.