Slashdot Mirror

And AAA fought airbags, seatbelts, emissions controls, etc.

http://transalt.org/sites/defa...

Don't listen to what organizations say without looking to see where they get their money.

There ^^, fixed it for you. Catalonia isn't a separate state (yet). For most of us outside the US we don't even need to qualify which country Barcelona's in because we all know this as a given, and anywhere else in the new world that has the same name is the exception and needs to be qualified. Interesting that you mentioned "Catalonia" though... pushing some sort of political agenda or just ignorance of the place? Also interesting that you picked Barcelona and not some other better known or more congested city. This whole story just seems a bit weird and parochial.

Actually why even this story about San Francisco? It's hardly the worst offender in the US for pedestrian deaths at 1.7 deaths/100,000 - picking three comparable sized cities from Table 8 of this doc:
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/P...
* Detroit, MI: 3.99
* Jacksonville, FL: 3.23
* Austin, TX: 2.97

It looks to me like a lot of US cities could do a lot to reclaim their cities back from cars, when you look at London which is vastly bigger and more congested with pedestrians. There were 65 pedestrians killed in London in 2013 compared with San Francisco's 29, which is a city a tenth the size:
https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/me...
http://www.transalt.org/sites/...

You bring up a good point. NYC is replacing the word "accident" with "collision" because "In the past, the term 'accident' has sometimes given the inaccurate impression or connotation that there is no fault or liability associated with a specific event."

We should all think twice before using the word "accident." Because driver negligence is the number one cause of crashes, more often than not the word "accident" when used in the context of automobile collisions is imprecise at best, and deceptive at worst. And isn't it just easier to say "crash"?

I guess I have a different attitude than the police. The driver's offense was stopping well forward of the stop line (and obstructing the crosswalk -- two offenses, actually). It's a relatively common offense here near Boston. The pedestrian was mostly at fault, but without the driver's contribution it would not have happened -- she, like me, would have been able to see the jaywalking ped.

I ride a bicycle a lot (I also drive). We hear lots about how important it is to Obey The Law, and what Bad People we are for running stop lights and stop signs (because always, judge the group by the actions of a few). If you don't ticket offenses when the bad outcome actually occurs, what's the point?

I don't think that the reduction in pedestrian deaths is necessarily caused by better car design (as of 2007, deployed in some EU cars and some concept cars). There haven't been that many changes in this country, and at the SUV/minivan level, none that I can perceive at all. On the other hand, we have tightened up licensing restrictions for new drivers (in some states), we've had years of MADD-inspired ratcheting down of tolerance for drunk driving, and we're also in a recession (which cuts driving by a bit). It is apparently the case (at least in some studies in NYC) that adding bicycle lanes in urban areas tends to increase pedestrian safety (and driver safety), and we've been doing a fair amount of that in recent years. It appears to be a matter of reduced speeding (i.e., "traffic calming").

And studies have shown that red light cameras *decrease* crashes.

http://www.transalt.org/files/newsroom/reports/slowingspeeds.html

It found that most people who drive into Manhattan below 60th Street do so because of the comfort and convenience of their cars, ignoring easily available public transportation... [And] that a large share of people driving into Manhattan are bound for somewhere else and therefore contribute little to the city's economy beyond bridge or tunnel tolls. It said 61 percent of those crossing East River bridges were making through trips and that more than 30 percent of those using Hudson River tunnels were bound for destinations outside Manhattan's main business district.

Actually, a city bus would not be going 30+ mph. In fact, we should let these people get hit by buses going at 3.4mph

If iPods were causing more deaths, then there should be a spike in the death rate after their introduction in 2001. graph

Instead, the graph is steadily declining. No spike at 1999 either when the Blackberry was introduced.

However, 72% of the 15,000 pedestrians that are injured by drivers of motor vehicles every year are hit while they are in a crosswalk. Obviously, since crosswalks are so prevalent in pedestrian injuries they should be banned from the entire city.

A quick Google search will find much more of the same.

Errr, I'm going to assume that you're NOT a New Yorker. Because anyone who lives there can refute damn near everything you just said.

The high asthma rate is mostly due not to Manhattan itself but to the borough of NYC called Staten Island, which was used as a gargantuan landfill for generations. The landfill has since closed though and the problem is becoming less severe. However, another cause is believed to be the factories on the Jersey shore which blow all of their pollutans east over the southern boroughs of Staten Island and Brooklyn.

The cyclist problem is one prevalent in many large cities in small geographical areas.

However, in recent years many more New Yorkers have given up even owning a car due to parking problems and the issue is resolving itself for the most part.

As for the point of excrement-less grass, have you ever even SEEN Central Park?

Or Battery Park? Or any of the parks in any of the boroughs? Yes there's a great deal of trash but it's hardly the pig-stay you pretend to know it to be. The only incredibly filthy place I can think of is the subway, and that's usually manageable.

And finally, as for your comment on the absence of a middle class... First off, you misused the word eviscerated; unless everyone in the middle class has been systematically disembowled that is.

And second, that's not true. The middle class has mostly moved from the city to the outlying surburbs on the other boroughs, and not from financial difficulty, but mostly from the desire to "escape the clutter of living in the city." As a single adult living in a city is great, but it's not always the ideal place to relax/raise a family in.

High & Mighty, a great book on the subject, painstakingly shows how American car companies shoe horned SUVs into the light truck category to avoid safety and environmental requirements. Free of these requirements, SUVs evolved to become as dangerous to fellow drivers as possible. They were built high, with bumpers that rode over other cars, and stiff under bodies that did impaled its victims. The government looked the other way, protecting American Motors, and then Chrysler, until it was too late.

And your other point about the physics of big cars being fundamentally safer ignores all the improvements in car design that has occurred over the past 35 years. Cars are now built with air bags, crumple zones, and unibody construction. I'll let others who are more knowledgeable than me weigh in, but I think a modern Camry is actually safer for its occupants than a 1972 mid-sized car.

In closing, nobody's evil here, I have close family who drive SUVs, and calling them names doesn't go over well at reunions. That being said, Randy Cohen, the New York Times' Ethicist eloquently concluded that it is selfish to drive a vehicle that puts others at mortal risk for style or comfort. Food for thought when deciding what our next vehicle should be.

Surprisingly enough, NY doesn't have any intersections listed in the top 10 most dangerous intersections list, compiled by State Farm.

However, you can find the 24 most dangerous intersections in NY, as compiled by the NYPD here.

Either way, crossing the street isn't the safest thing in the world.

Here (don't let the rather garish site design put you off) is a site on banning car alarms in NYC. They have some information (sadly the complete report is only available in PDF - "Bad Web Designer!") that fairly convincingly (to me anyway) makes the point that car alarms are pretty close to useless and cause other problems as well. Of course, it also turns out that the car alarm manufacturers are lobbying hard against any such move.

• Using your knowledge and expertise to help other people. Not least, it's easy to show your support to various worthy causes and help get the countries decision makers to do some good. Here are some ideas:
• • Fed up of car alarms (especially in New York)? Then check out these people and some background. They have useful information that can be used to support a car alarm ban and show that there are much better ways of preventing car theft.
  • Everyone knows nerds are fueled by coffee - And most people are kinda aware that coffee-growers are getting ripped off by the big coffee buyers, causing them to face job loss and starvation as well as environmental degradation - Shoot Procter and Gamble an eFax asking them to invest in 'Fair Trade' Coffee.
• Start a new hobby!
• • Go Running! or blading
  • Cook something Southern
  • Take up abstract painting - Try recreating your own version of famous exhibits!
• Otherwise.....
• • Plan a holiday to France
  • Get a date - there's plenty of possibilities out there!

;) dave

No, only 37.5% of the bridges into Manhattan charge a toll. The rest are free. I used to drive to work in Manhattan from Brooklyn every day for no toll at all- and I had four local bridges to choose from.

Exhibit one:
New York Metropolitan Transit Authority (toll) Bridges & Tunnels map

Exhibit two:
Transportation Alternatives' 5-borough bridge map

There are lots of ways into Manhattan without paying - you just have to navigate a little.

Actually, coward, I am a pedestrian in NYC as well as a cyclist in NYC and I can tell you first hand that pedestrians are their own worst enemy. The worst offenders are midtown jaywalkers who assume that since everyone else is crossing on the red that they don't have to look both ways and can cross whenever they please.
Transportation Alternatives has a slew of information on bike accident statistics in the city. I'm not going to quote there site except to say that in 1992 in NYC pedestrians were 50 times more likely to be hit by a car than by a bike.

I think if you were truly to examine the danger that a bike poses to a pedestrian, you would look at reckless pedestrians first, reckless cycling second, and the stealth with which bikes noiselessly move third. Incidentally, the lack of noise is going to be a huge problem when, in 10 or 15 years, electric vehicles become commonplace. Pedestrians and cyclists rely on our ears more than we realize.