|
|
| Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? (1309539) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
|
| (1309539) | |
Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Aug 25 14:55:21 2015 Sheepsheadbites BlogTHE COMMUTE: A hallmark of Mayor Bill de Blasio’s term has been his emphasis on pedestrian safety, most notably the Vision Zero campaign. You all know where I stand on this issue. My position has been controversial. Whenever I discuss my opposition to some of the features of Vision Zero, those who disagree make the same argument: that the slower a vehicle travels, the less likely a pedestrian will be killed. That analysis is overly simplistic because other factors need to be considered, such as the need to get people to their destinations in a reasonable amount of time... |
|
|
| (1309542) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Tue Aug 25 15:09:29 2015, in response to Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Aug 25 14:55:21 2015. Did you read what you just wrote?the slower a vehicle travels, the less likely a pedestrian will be killed. That analysis is overly simplistic because other factors need to be considered, such as the need to get people to their destinations in a reasonable amount of time... Whether you realize it or not you have just balanced dead pedestrians vs. getting to your destination in a reasonable time. Which suggests the question: How many dead are a reasonable tradeoff for how much saved travel time? |
|
|
| (1309544) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Aug 25 15:10:44 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by SLRT on Tue Aug 25 15:09:29 2015. IAWTP |
|
|
| (1309552) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Aug 25 16:26:26 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by SLRT on Tue Aug 25 15:09:29 2015. How many dead are a reasonable tradeoff for how much saved travel time?This is actually a legitimate question. We implicitly make this tradeoff all the time. We don't always do it well. |
|
|
| (1309564) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Aug 25 17:49:28 2015, in response to Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Aug 25 14:55:21 2015. Let me try to address a couple of your misconceptions.It is a known fact that the chance of being involved in a fatal car accident is greater on a highway than on a city street. So using the same logic, shouldn’t we shut down all expressways or also turn them into local streets? No one is proposing that because those fatalities usually do not involve pedestrians. The relation between impact speed and severity of pedestrian injury was first recognized in a paper presented to the SAE by Ashton and Mackay in 1979. The authors recommended that automobiles be redesigned to mitigate pedestrian collision injuries as automobiles had been redesigned to mitigate driver and passenger injuries in crashes. The automobile industry, with government prodding, has invested billions to successfully protect automobile occupants. The annual death toll was reduced from around 50K/year to 40K/year. This was the result in redesigning automobiles to avoid what Ralph Nader called the second collision. The overall collision rate has increased slightly during the same period. Nothing has been done to study how cars can be redesigned to reduce injury severity to pedestrians. Ashton and Mackay noted bumper height was one variable that influenced injury severity. Even the simple task of standardizing bumper heights and then designing them to a safer height has been successfully resisted by the automobile industry. In the 36 years since the appearance of Ashton and Mackay's article, no car manufacturer has come forward with a car that is safer to pedestrians on impact. The only remaining remedy to reduce the severity of pedestrian impact injuries is to reduce the impact speed. The reason it's the only remedy is because it does not require the cooperation of car manufacturers. The 25 mph speed limit was not supposed to affect major arterial streets where the limit has traditionally been 35 or 40 mph. Yet, those were the first streets targeted under the mayor’s arterial slow zones campaign to turn arterials into local streets, using the logic that arterials are more dangerous to pedestrians. Somebody did some analysis of where most serious and fatal collisions were happening. Guess what - it was on the arterial streets. If one wants to reduce serious pedestrians collisions, you do something about where they are occurring. The increased injury rates were in excess of the arterial traffic volumes. That's a smoking gun for the hypothesis that it is the increased speed on arterial streets that made them less safe for pedestrians. The speed limit for arterial streets was 25 mph until 1952. It was raised gradually. Raising the limit had nothing to do with improved peripheral visibility on these roadways. It's the peripheral visibility that's important in detecting pedestrians on sidewalks and cross streets. Building since 1952, has reduced driver horizontal field of vision. Drivers don't have x-ray vision to look through corner buildings that did not exist in 1952. |
|
|
| (1309569) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by Charles G on Tue Aug 25 17:59:38 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by AlM on Tue Aug 25 16:26:26 2015. Exactly. Many of the arguments that have been put forth for reducing the speed limit from 30 to 25 is just as valid for subsequently reducing the limit from 25 to 20 and then from 20 to 15 and on until the speed limit is zero. After all, nobody can be hit by a vehicle that is stopped. |
|
|
| (1309571) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by Charles G on Tue Aug 25 18:04:08 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Aug 25 17:49:28 2015. The relation between impact speed and severity of pedestrian injury was first recognized in a paper presented to the SAE by Ashton and Mackay in 1979 Seriously? The first people to notice that the speed at Impact had an influence on severity did so in 1979? LOL at pompous academic speak that is ridiculously false on its face. Laughing even harder at using such a flawed statement to begin the piece. Nice way to create doubt about everything else below |
|
|
| (1309572) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Aug 25 18:04:46 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by Charles G on Tue Aug 25 17:59:38 2015. True, but I've seen people who are texting walk right into parked cars. :) |
|
|
| (1309575) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by displaced angeleno on Tue Aug 25 18:19:25 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by Charles G on Tue Aug 25 18:04:08 2015. It was the first study to formally document crash speeds and their effects on pedestrian injury.But seriously, thank god for poorly worded sentences. They make great excuses to avoid taking people's insightful thoughts seriously. |
|
|
| (1309589) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Aug 25 19:42:08 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by Charles G on Tue Aug 25 18:04:08 2015. By relation, one means a quantitative relation. Plug in speed, get out probability of serious injury/death with a certain confidence interval. |
|
|
| (1309616) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by ftgreeneg on Tue Aug 25 21:59:14 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by Charles G on Tue Aug 25 17:59:38 2015. Basically it getting rediculous in the city. First they lower the speed limit. Now i notice DOT restricting where you can turn. Everytime i drive there is another no turn sign put up. They are making it som much harder to drive around the city. In brooklyn where i live driving down Atlantic Ave there's stretches where you damn near have to drive almost a mile bf a driver can make a legal left turn. |
|
|
| (1309633) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Jaywalker Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Aug 26 01:41:54 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by SLRT on Tue Aug 25 15:09:29 2015. I've never hit a pedestrian because I don't drive on the sidewalk. That said, I've never hit and killed a jaywalker. |
|
|
| (1309634) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Jaywalker Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed Aug 26 01:56:41 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Jaywalker Fatalities?, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Aug 26 01:41:54 2015. Do they even HAVE sidewalks out where you live? |
|
|
| (1309635) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by dkupf on Wed Aug 26 02:14:20 2015, in response to Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Aug 25 14:55:21 2015. "If you hit someone at 30 mph, you are twice as likely to kill them than if you hit them at 25 mph."Though taken from the NYC Vision Zero website, this is not propaganda. This is scientific fact based on various studies that I forgot about. As far as I'm concerned, one pedestrian death is one too many. I held this stance long before the Vision Zero initiative, and will continue to do so in the future. Traffic calming is always controversial, but must be done to eliminate pedestrian deaths. And that's a good thing. That being said, I think that traffic calming should be used on Woodhaven Blvd, but not to the extremes that most NYCDOT officials have proposed. The elimination of traffic lanes would not reduce traffic, but shift it to the surrounding communities. And, that's not good. |
|
|
| (1309649) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Jaywalker Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Wed Aug 26 06:54:12 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Jaywalker Fatalities?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed Aug 26 01:56:41 2015. Do you have sidewalks, Selkoik? If so, do coyotes have the right of way? |
|
|
| (1309650) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Wed Aug 26 06:57:40 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by dkupf on Wed Aug 26 02:14:20 2015. As any brakeman is supposed to know, force of impact is the square of the increase in speed. So if you're a coupling two cars at 4 miles an hour, the impact is FOUR TIMES that at 2 miles an hour, not twice. |
|
|
| (1309651) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Aug 26 07:25:11 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Aug 25 17:49:28 2015. One problem with big-city driving, as you point out, is restricted driver vision due to building placement. This has the effect of sometimes placing the point of no return (you are going to hit someone or something) before the point of possible perception, in other words, it's hopeless.Another factor, which rate of speed only partially mitigates, is what actually happens to pedestrians when they are struck by vehicles. For cars, pedestrians often sustain "bumper fractures" to their legs, and then go up and over the front hood, sometimes hitting the windshield or being flung high into the air. For trucks, beese, and some larger SUVs, the pedestrian goes down under the vehicle, sometimes getting run over by the wheels. The energy being transferred to the pedestrian is a function of both speed and them mass of the vehicle, but I've seen patients get critically injured in parking garages. At low speeds, you get that slow, twisting, grinding kind f injury, which is why I say speed only partially mitigates the effects on the pedestrian. It is true that speed does make a life-or-death difference. |
|
|
| (1309652) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Aug 26 07:33:40 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by SLRT on Wed Aug 26 06:57:40 2015. As any brakeman is supposed to know, force of impact is the square of the increase in speedYou're confusing energy with force. |
|
|
| (1309658) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Aug 26 07:53:48 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Aug 26 07:25:11 2015. One problem with big-city driving, as you point out, is restricted driver vision due to building placement. This has the effect of sometimes placing the point of no return (you are going to hit someone or something) before the point of possible perception, in other words, it's hopeless.Another contributor is parked cars, especially those with tinted windows. They also restrict the drivers' field of view. Cars parked up to the crosswalk also obstruct the pedestrians' view of oncoming traffic. However, free street parking is another driver perquisite that trumps pedestrian safety. |
|
|
| (1309660) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Jaywalker Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Aug 26 08:27:28 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Jaywalker Fatalities?, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Aug 26 01:41:54 2015. I've never hit a pedestrian because I don't drive on the sidewalk. That said, I've never hit and killed a jaywalker.Have you heard about reckless turns and going through red lights? I'm glad you've never done this, but plenty of pedestrians have been hit when they had a walk signal (including an acquaintance of mine), by a driver making a turn and failing to yield to pedestrians or by a driver going through a red light. |
|
|
| (1309661) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Aug 26 08:28:24 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Aug 26 07:33:40 2015. But of course energy is the relevant quantity in terms of expected injury caused. |
|
|
| (1309663) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Jaywalker Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Aug 26 08:39:58 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Jaywalker Fatalities?, posted by AlM on Wed Aug 26 08:27:28 2015. Don’t forget drivers who speed through a curve or over a hill and don’t see a crossing pedestrian until it’s too late. |
|
|
| (1309664) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Jaywalker Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Aug 26 08:46:37 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Jaywalker Fatalities?, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Aug 26 08:39:58 2015. True. Probably lots of other ways a driver can recklessly kill a pedestrian as well. I just haven't exercised my imagination to think of them. |
|
|
| (1309666) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Jaywalker Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Aug 26 09:02:43 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Jaywalker Fatalities?, posted by AlM on Wed Aug 26 08:46:37 2015. When I worked at NYC*EMS, I used to look down into cars alongside my ambulance, and I would see drivers writing checks, talking on the phone, applying makeup, everything except actually driving their fookin' cars. Naturally, these are the same drives that I'd later find bashed through a storefront window, wondering how it happened. |
|
|
| (1309753) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Wed Aug 26 13:12:47 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by AlM on Wed Aug 26 08:28:24 2015. So the point is valid, nitpick or not. |
|
|
| (1309757) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Aug 26 13:31:04 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by SLRT on Wed Aug 26 13:12:47 2015. Yes. It's an important nit but the point is still totally valid. Twice the speed does 4 times the damage. |
|
|
| (1309804) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Jaywalker Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed Aug 26 17:03:18 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Jaywalker Fatalities?, posted by SLRT on Wed Aug 26 06:54:12 2015. Nope ... no sidewalks and yes. Roving gangs of coyotes often hijack passing cars out here. But yeah, that's why I was wondering about Olog since he makes it sound that he's even further out in the boonies than I am. :) |
|
|
| (1309865) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Aug 26 18:45:53 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by ftgreeneg on Tue Aug 25 21:59:14 2015. On Woodhaven you will only be able to turn left once every mile. They eliminated two anes on Pennsylnania south of Flatlands withoutevn adding bus or bike lanes. What is the sense in that? |
|
|
| (1309870) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Aug 26 18:49:36 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Aug 26 07:25:11 2015. Then fix the zoning that allows that. |
|
|
| (1309873) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Aug 26 18:53:38 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Aug 26 07:53:48 2015. That's why they have daylighting. It is a better way to improve safety tan reducing arterial speed limits or shoud I say eliminating arterials so all you have a local streets and limited access highways. Areas without highways are now forced to make their entire trip on local streets for ten or 15 miles which is ridiculous at an average speed at 12 mph.Arterials are the compromise between highways and local streets and serve an important purpose. Your chances of an accident being fatal are greater on highways than on local streets. Yet we don't eliminate all highways. |
|
|
| (1309875) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Aug 26 18:57:53 2015, in response to Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Aug 25 14:55:21 2015. As I stated this entire emphasis on reducing pedestrian fatalities without examining any of the other consequences blows the issue out of proportion. Tell me where is Vision Zero to reduce the much more serious problem of unnecessary hospital deaths numbering at 210,000 per year nationally. By comparison pedestrian fatalities are 5,000 per year. Which problem is more serious and which is getting more attention? |
|
|
| (1309908) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Aug 26 19:57:21 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Aug 26 18:53:38 2015. Your chances of an accident being fatal are greater on highways than on local streets.That's because of the higher speeds on highways. Areas without highways are now forced to make their entire trip on local streets for ten or 15 miles which is ridiculous at an average speed at 12 mph. 70% of all motor vehicle trips originating in NYC are under 2 miles. 90% of all motor vehicle trips originating in NYC are under 10 miles. |
|
|
| (1309912) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Aug 26 20:00:08 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Aug 26 18:49:36 2015. Then fix the zoning that allows that.Real estate is more valuable uses than to provide adequate sight distances to go ever faster speeds on streets. |
|
|
| (1309914) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Aug 26 20:05:23 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Aug 26 18:49:36 2015. In a city with the most valuable real estate on Earth? Not bloody likely! |
|
|
| (1309922) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by TerrapIN StatiON on Wed Aug 26 20:45:29 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Aug 26 18:45:53 2015. What is the sense in that?Why don't you ask them instead of us? |
|
|
| (1309923) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Aug 26 20:48:23 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by TerrapIN StatiON on Wed Aug 26 20:45:29 2015. They will say just say its a traffic calming technique to slow down cars and tat thy could add bus or bike lanes in the future which of ourselves would mean restriping. I have dealt long enough with these agencies to know I won't get a straight answer. |
|
|
| (1309924) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Aug 26 20:52:02 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Aug 26 19:57:21 2015. 1. That is my point. We don't lower highway traffic to 30 or 35 mph unless it is a work zone although slower speeds should reduce fatalities.2. I don't know where your statistics are from but I don't believe you. Except for grocery shopping, none of my car trips are under two miles. Most are at least 20. I used to drive 20 miles to go to work. |
|
|
| (1309933) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by ftgreeneg on Wed Aug 26 23:37:24 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Aug 26 18:45:53 2015. I agree imo they are taking the easy way out. Instead of installing more turn only stop lights it's easier and cheaper to just make left turns illegal. It's getting to the point where making left turns onb2 way streets is going to be illegal in NYC. |
|
|
| (1309950) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Aug 27 07:41:55 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Aug 26 20:52:02 2015. We don't lower highway traffic to 30 or 35 mph unless it is a work zone although slower speeds should reduce fatalities.We are using the term "highway" as a limited access highway. The only place somebody on foot is on a highway is in a work zone. The speed is reduced to protect them. You are not prepared to extend the same courtesy to pedestrians on streets. Arterial streets are supposed to maintain speeds in excess of highway work zones despite that presence of pedestrians. Moreover, these pedestrians are scattered at random not in a concentrated work zone. I don't know where your statistics are from The NYMTC Regional Household Travel Survey. but I don't believe you. What's the basis for your judgement, if you don't know a statement's source or the methodology used to derive it? Except for grocery shopping, none of my car trips are under two miles. Most are at least 20. I used to drive 20 miles to go to work. Extrapolating one's own anecdotal experience to that of the general population is dangerous. One might be an outlier without realizing it. That's why it better to first find out what the general population does before assuming everyone is exactly like one's self. |
|
|
| (1309954) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Aug 27 08:37:29 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Aug 27 07:41:55 2015. Extrapolating one's own anecdotal experience to that of the general population is dangerous. One might be an outlier without realizing it.Yep. My parents-in-law lived quite a ways from any subway station in Queens and most of their trips were short ones. I live in Manhattan and my car is parked some distance away, so I only drive when it's worth my while, and almost all my car trips are 5 miles or more. For short trips I walk or take the subway, and a very occasional bus or cab. |
|
|
| (1309956) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Aug 27 08:45:37 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Aug 26 18:57:53 2015. As I stated this entire emphasis on reducing pedestrian fatalities without examining any of the other consequences blows the issue out of proportion. Tell me where is Vision Zero to reduce the much more serious problem of unnecessary hospital deaths numbering at 210,000 per year nationally. By comparison pedestrian fatalities are 5,000 per year. Which problem is more serious and which is getting more attention?What would you like DOT to do about unnecessary hospital deaths? |
|
|
| (1309993) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Aug 27 10:26:07 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Aug 27 07:41:55 2015. I have no time now to address your second point.You totally missed the other point I was making because of your narrow tunnel vision whereby the only fatalities that matter are pedestrians. I was not questioning lower speed limits in work zones so the point I was making went completely over your head. I am saying that all vehicular deaths are just as important. We need to make the same effort to curb them as pedestrian deaths. If driving at slower speeds results in fewer deaths whether ter be pedestrians or those in motor vehicles who are killed, why lower the speed on arterial roads to turn them into local streets without lowering the speeds also on limited access highways. Wouldn't a 40 mph speed limit on limited access highways result in fewer deaths than a 50 mph speed limit, not that I am advocating that? Yet you insist arterials should be eliminated where there are no highways near them because it's safer for pedestrians. By advocating that and not proposing lower highway speed limits you are valuing a pedestrian's life greater than a motorist's life. That s my point. |
|
|
| (1309995) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Thu Aug 27 10:35:03 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Aug 27 10:26:07 2015. The emphasis on pedestrian safety is based on the fact that motor vehicle occupants are at least protected by the vehicle and its safety features, whereas pedestrians absorb the full force of whatever hits them. It's not a question of favoring one life over the other. |
|
|
| (1309996) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Aug 27 10:35:38 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by JayZeeBMT on Thu Aug 27 10:35:03 2015. Exactly what I was about to post. Thank you. |
|
|
| (1309998) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Thu Aug 27 10:39:26 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Aug 27 10:35:38 2015. We agree on something? Hell hath frozen over! LOL! |
|
|
| (1310001) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Aug 27 10:50:59 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by JayZeeBMT on Thu Aug 27 10:39:26 2015. We agree on a lot of things. I don’t know why you only notice the few things that we disagree about. |
|
|
| (1310016) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by terRAPIN station on Thu Aug 27 12:09:24 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Aug 26 20:48:23 2015. How did they eliminate two lanes? With restriping? |
|
|
| (1310017) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Aug 27 12:11:08 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Aug 27 10:26:07 2015. I am saying that all vehicular deaths are just as important. We need to make the same effort to curb them as pedestrian deaths.Vision Zero does refer to zero traffic fatalities, not just pedestrian fatalities. It just so happens that more than half of traffic fatalities in New York are pedestrians. The added bonus is that lower speeds also make vehicle occupants less likely to become traffic fatalities. |
|
|
| (1310018) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Aug 27 12:13:58 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by ftgreeneg on Wed Aug 26 23:37:24 2015. Instead of installing more turn only stop lights it's easier and cheaper to just make left turns illegal.Adding protected left turn phases means increasing the red time for everyone else, putting the through movements over capacity in many cases. |
|
|
| (1310019) | |
Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities? |
|
|
Posted by cortelyounext on Thu Aug 27 12:16:44 2015, in response to Re: Why the Emphasis on Pedestrian Fatalities?, posted by terRAPIN station on Thu Aug 27 12:09:24 2015. Here |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|