2 ms·

Distracted pedestrians is a good guess. I regularly see people on their smartphones crossing the street when they don’t have right of way (like no blinking walk

Distracted pedestrians is a good guess. I regularly see people on their smartphones crossing the street when they don’t have right of way (like no blinking walking sign). There is also a trend of a lot of pedestrians dying at night, for which there are various theories if you do a search for this topic. But more than 75% of pedestrian deaths are at night. Note that road fatalities per capita is 85% of what it was 20 years ago, and it is similarly lower if you look at it on a per mile driven basis. Sales of consumer trucks is 150% of what it was 20 years ago, despite the reduction in fatalities over that time. So I don’t think we can really attribute deaths to trucks or SUVs.

klingoff 2y ago
The implementation of standards for roads greatly improved over the decades and areas that haven't been touched by a modern project tend to not be high density. I.e. a blinking walking sign?
dopylitty 2y ago
Distracted pedestrians are a red herring propagated by the auto manufacturers[0]. When studies actually look at the issue deaths are not caused by distracted pedestrians but by poor road and vehicle design[1]. > Contrary to their portrayal as reckless rule-breakers, distracted pedestrians were more likely to cross with the light and use the crosswalk. Similarly, while distracted walkers did indeed take longer to identify gaps in traffic, this is a form of compensatory behavior that reduces risk. >The authors point to two alternative culprits for the rise in pedestrian deaths: distracted driving and SUVs, both of which are incredibly deadly and have become more prevalent over time. >Similarly, the risks to pedestrians were lowest in tech centers (San Francisco, New York, and Seattle) and in college towns (Madison, Wisc.). Instead, pedestrian risks were highest in several metropolitan areas of Florida that are known more for their inhospitable streetscapes than their distracted walkers. 0: https://citationsneeded.medium.com/the-great-neoliberal-burden-shift-part-i-how-corporate-america-offset-liability-onto-the-public-f6398cc11afc https://citationsneeded.medium.com/the-great-neoliberal-burd... 1:https://bloustein.rutgers.edu/distracted-pedestrians-may-not-be-the-issue/ https://bloustein.rutgers.edu/distracted-pedestrians-may-not...

klingoff 2y ago

The implementation of standards for roads greatly improved over the decades and areas that haven't been touched by a modern project tend to not be high density. I.e. a blinking walking sign?

dopylitty 2y ago

Distracted pedestrians are a red herring propagated by the auto manufacturers[0]. When studies actually look at the issue deaths are not caused by distracted pedestrians but by poor road and vehicle design[1]. > Contrary to their portrayal as reckless rule-breakers, distracted pedestrians were more likely to cross with the light and use the crosswalk. Similarly, while distracted walkers did indeed take longer to identify gaps in traffic, this is a form of compensatory behavior that reduces risk. >The authors point to two alternative culprits for the rise in pedestrian deaths: distracted driving and SUVs, both of which are incredibly deadly and have become more prevalent over time. >Similarly, the risks to pedestrians were lowest in tech centers (San Francisco, New York, and Seattle) and in college towns (Madison, Wisc.). Instead, pedestrian risks were highest in several metropolitan areas of Florida that are known more for their inhospitable streetscapes than their distracted walkers. 0: https://citationsneeded.medium.com/the-great-neoliberal-burden-shift-part-i-how-corporate-america-offset-liability-onto-the-public-f6398cc11afc https://citationsneeded.medium.com/the-great-neoliberal-burd... 1:https://bloustein.rutgers.edu/distracted-pedestrians-may-not-be-the-issue/ https://bloustein.rutgers.edu/distracted-pedestrians-may-not...