5 ms·

It’s the same language used when taking about “car accidents” They aren’t accidents, it’s an inherent part of how we designed cars and roads and we decided as

It’s the same language used when taking about “car accidents” They aren’t accidents, it’s an inherent part of how we designed cars and roads and we decided as society that we are ok with thousands of people killed by cars.

playworker 1y ago
killed by drivers, cars are inanimate objects
- tirant 1y ago
  Killed semantics includes intentionality (and lack of), while dying by accident clearly removes any intentionality whatsoever. So it's much more faithful to truth to talk about accidents than by killing, even if both terms are semantically correct.
  - portaouflop 1y ago
    It’s intentional though see above comment by throw0101c. I agree that it’s a hard pill to swallow especially if you are US American.
    - hrimfaxi 1y ago
      > I agree that it’s a hard pill to swallow especially if you are US American. Can you point me to countries that don't deflect agency in accident reporting? Here's a headline from just today in the UK: > Man airlifted to hospital after pedestrian hit First line in of the story: > A man has been airlifted to hospital after a vehicle hit a pedestrian.
      - portaouflop 1y ago
        You are right, it’s an international problem. But from my experience few nations are so dependent on the car as the US. It so very similar in Germany where I’m from but mostly because it’s such an important part of the economy. But in a big city you can easily live without a car. I found this almost impossible in the US.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
throw0101c 1y ago
> It’s the same language used when taking about “car accidents” See perhaps the book There Are no Accidents by Jessie Singer: > We hear it all the time: “Sorry, it was just an accident.” And we’ve been deeply conditioned to just accept that explanation and move on. But as Jessie Singer argues convincingly: There are no such things as accidents. The vast majority of mishaps are not random but predictable and preventable. Singer uncovers just how the term “accident” itself protects those in power and leaves the most vulnerable in harm’s way, preventing investigations, pushing off debts, blaming the victims, diluting anger, and even sparking empathy for the perpetrators. […] > In this revelatory book, Singer tracks accidental death in America from turn of the century factories and coal mines to today’s urban highways, rural hospitals, and Superfund sites. Drawing connections between traffic accidents, accidental opioid overdoses, and accidental oil spills, Singer proves that what we call accidents are hardly random. Rather, who lives and dies by an accident in America is defined by money and power. She also presents a variety of actions we can take as individuals and as a society to stem the tide of “accidents”—saving lives and holding the guilty to account. * https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/There-Are-No-Accidents/Jessie-Singer/9781982129682 https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/There-Are-No-Accident... For automobiles specifically: * https://crashnotaccident.com https://crashnotaccident.com * https://www.michigan.gov/mdot/travel/safety/road-users/crash-not-accident https://www.michigan.gov/mdot/travel/safety/road-users/crash... * https://www.roadpeace.org/working-for-change/crash-not-accident/ https://www.roadpeace.org/working-for-change/crash-not-accid...
- mewpmewp2 1y ago
  Michigan.gov website references Merriam-Webster dictionary definition "an unfortunate event resulting especially from carelessness or ignorance". Then it says no one is at fault, but the definition specifically included carelessness and ignorance which does imply fault. > Calling a crash an “accident” suggests no one is at fault. In reality, crashes result from preventable actions like distraction, inattention, or risky driving. But all of these go under carelessness / ignorance. And there is always a party that's at fault traffic accidents. Normal dialogue: Bob: I got into a traffic accident. Alice: Who was at fault? Bob: ...

playworker 1y ago

killed by drivers, cars are inanimate objects

tirant 1y ago
Killed semantics includes intentionality (and lack of), while dying by accident clearly removes any intentionality whatsoever. So it's much more faithful to truth to talk about accidents than by killing, even if both terms are semantically correct.
- portaouflop 1y ago
  It’s intentional though see above comment by throw0101c. I agree that it’s a hard pill to swallow especially if you are US American.
  - hrimfaxi 1y ago
    > I agree that it’s a hard pill to swallow especially if you are US American. Can you point me to countries that don't deflect agency in accident reporting? Here's a headline from just today in the UK: > Man airlifted to hospital after pedestrian hit First line in of the story: > A man has been airlifted to hospital after a vehicle hit a pedestrian.
    - portaouflop 1y ago
      You are right, it’s an international problem. But from my experience few nations are so dependent on the car as the US. It so very similar in Germany where I’m from but mostly because it’s such an important part of the economy. But in a big city you can easily live without a car. I found this almost impossible in the US.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

throw0101c 1y ago

> It’s the same language used when taking about “car accidents” See perhaps the book There Are no Accidents by Jessie Singer: > We hear it all the time: “Sorry, it was just an accident.” And we’ve been deeply conditioned to just accept that explanation and move on. But as Jessie Singer argues convincingly: There are no such things as accidents. The vast majority of mishaps are not random but predictable and preventable. Singer uncovers just how the term “accident” itself protects those in power and leaves the most vulnerable in harm’s way, preventing investigations, pushing off debts, blaming the victims, diluting anger, and even sparking empathy for the perpetrators. […] > In this revelatory book, Singer tracks accidental death in America from turn of the century factories and coal mines to today’s urban highways, rural hospitals, and Superfund sites. Drawing connections between traffic accidents, accidental opioid overdoses, and accidental oil spills, Singer proves that what we call accidents are hardly random. Rather, who lives and dies by an accident in America is defined by money and power. She also presents a variety of actions we can take as individuals and as a society to stem the tide of “accidents”—saving lives and holding the guilty to account. * https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/There-Are-No-Accidents/Jessie-Singer/9781982129682 https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/There-Are-No-Accident... For automobiles specifically: * https://crashnotaccident.com https://crashnotaccident.com * https://www.michigan.gov/mdot/travel/safety/road-users/crash-not-accident https://www.michigan.gov/mdot/travel/safety/road-users/crash... * https://www.roadpeace.org/working-for-change/crash-not-accident/ https://www.roadpeace.org/working-for-change/crash-not-accid...

mewpmewp2 1y ago
Michigan.gov website references Merriam-Webster dictionary definition "an unfortunate event resulting especially from carelessness or ignorance". Then it says no one is at fault, but the definition specifically included carelessness and ignorance which does imply fault. > Calling a crash an “accident” suggests no one is at fault. In reality, crashes result from preventable actions like distraction, inattention, or risky driving. But all of these go under carelessness / ignorance. And there is always a party that's at fault traffic accidents. Normal dialogue: Bob: I got into a traffic accident. Alice: Who was at fault? Bob: ...