Georgia Pedestrain Deaths Spike. Other Cities See Large Improvements. (Atlanta: neighborhoods, zoning)

[jeoff]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Do you have any statistics to back your claim? Because clearly places that focus on improving street design and slowing cars are having more measurable success.

Per the Governors Highway Safety Association—75% of pedestrian fatalities occur at night, 72% away from crosswalks/signals, and 32% of pedestrians were drunk when hit (compared with 17% of drivers). SUV involved deaths have increased faster than passenger car deaths, but SUV sales increases can explain part (not all) of that. I still think, that in addition to other distractions, having bright screens being part of a vehicle’s operation doesn’t help things—especially at night.

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Can you please cite your source for increased NYC pedestrian deaths? The original source I posted originally states NYC saw a 30% drop to the lowest since 1910.

Yes. I do. I couldn't load the NYT or the Washington Times since they are paywalled, but this will do for now...

https://patch.com/new-york/new-york-...-low-city-says

Some 196 people had died in traffic crashes this year as of Thursday —the fewest since record-keeping began in 1910, Mayor Bill de Blasio's office said. The figure is down from 221 at the same point last year and reflects a 34 percent decrease since 2013.

The fifth consecutive year-to-year drop in total deaths comes despite increases in pedestrian and motorcycle fatalities. Some 111 pedestrians had died as of Dec. 27, up from 106 in the same period last year.

There were just 10 bicycle fatalities as of Dec. 27, less than half the 24 recorded at that point in 2017. And just 36 motor vehicle deaths had been recorded on that date, a nearly 38 percent drop from last year's 58.

So, while motorist deaths went down some 38% last year, pedestrian deaths rose 10%. They may be down from many years ago, but they went up somewhat last year.

But maybe I am just not the one to answer "how did we get bike riders to put helmets on" since I almost never wear one. Maybe you can detail how your campaign / or laws would work. What laws are you suggesting? Things like jaywalking laws already exist many places and they are not been associated with a measurable improvement in deaths. Or if it is a law like imposing a dress code on anyone crossing the street forbidding dark clothes, can you point to anywhere that has been successful in something like that?

I'm not suggesting laws. I'm suggesting that pedestrians use god damn common sense when crossing a major road. You seem to think that this is not reasonable. You are wrong. Maybe that's why pedestrian deaths are increasing. Maybe more of them, like you, actually believe that they shouldn't have to pay any attention to the world and roads around them and are the ones creating dangerous situations. That is entirely a possible (nay, likely) scenario.

So, I propose this (yes, this is tongue in cheek). You say that making roads more dangerous will slow drivers down and get them to pay more attention and that's the best way to reduce accidents. How about we make the roads far more dangerous for pedestrians so that they will pay more attention and be less likely to put themselves in a dangerous position. I mean, cars don't operate themselves, people do. So if creating more dangerous situations is the way to get people driving to be more safe, then maybe creating more dangerous situations is the way to get people walking to be more safe. There is absolutely nothing genetically different between a person driving and a person walking that means one is going to act differently than the other.

But helmets for bikers actually make you less safe and areas with less helmet wearing like the Netherlands have lower rates of bike deaths. So those are not great examples.

You sure about that? Bicycle Dutch

Disturbing news this morning: more people died on a bike than in a car in the Netherlands in 2017. A total of 206 people died on bicycles and 201 in cars.

The number of bicyclists to die in the entire state of Georgia in 2017 was 15, or less than 1% of overall road-related deaths. That's also a per-capita of 0.14 per 100,000 population. In the Netherlands bicycle deaths accounted for 35.4% of total road deaths, and 1.2 per 100,000 population. The Netherlands has approximately 35 times the rate per total road deaths, and nine times the number per population. The number of bicycle deaths in the Netherlands was 26.5% that of the US last year, but with 5% of the population. Of course, more people bike there, so that needs to be taken into account, like pretty much anything else.

Originally Posted by jsvh

Do you have any statistics to back your claim? Because clearly places that focus on improving street design and slowing cars are having more measurable success.

You want him to prove that paying attention before crossing a road can measurably decrease the chances of getting hit? You really need a source for that???

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by jeoff

Per the Governors Highway Safety Association—75% of pedestrian fatalities occur at night, 72% away from crosswalks/signals, and 32% of pedestrians were drunk when hit (compared with 17% of drivers). SUV involved deaths have increased faster than passenger car deaths, but SUV sales increases can explain part (not all) of that. I still think, that in addition to other distractions, having bright screens being part of a vehicle’s operation doesn’t help things—especially at night.

Those don't seem directly related to "looking both ways before crossing the road".

Have you considered that street design / lack of safe places to cross could be more of the source of the correlations you suggest?

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by samiwas1

I'm not suggesting laws. I'm suggesting that pedestrians use god damn common sense when crossing a major road. You seem to think that this is not reasonable. You are wrong.

Ok. You have suggested it. It has been suggested before. Your strategy of complaining about pedestrians on the internet didn't work. Deaths are still increasing in places relying on "suggestions of using common sense".

Can we now move the discussion towards strategies shown to work, such as redesigning the streets and slowing the cars?

Originally Posted by samiwas1

How about we make the roads far more dangerous for pedestrians so that they will pay more attention and be less likely to put themselves in a dangerous position. I mean, cars don't operate themselves, people do. So if creating more dangerous situations is the way to get people driving to be more safe, then maybe creating more dangerous situations is the way to get people walking to be more safe. There is absolutely nothing genetically different between a person driving and a person walking that means one is going to act differently than the other.

Because the high speed cars are the source of the danger. A drunk person stumbling down the street is only a danger to themselves. A drunk person behind the wheel of a car is a danger to everything and everyone around them.

There is nothing "genetically different" about a person walking or driving. They both can lack common sense or subject to the same flaws. But the high-speed cars are the source of the danger, hence why the efforts successful at improving safety are focused on drivers / cars.

Originally Posted by samiwas1

Of course, more people bike there, so that needs to be taken into account

You have solved your own mystery. Any rate based look at safety statistics will confirm that the helmet-less Dutch are in fact safer.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

I actually have to agree with the article in the aspect that suburban Atlanta is fairly hostile to pedestrians and is one of the core reasons I prefer to drive rather than bike or walk if I'm pretty much anywhere OTP.

If you see places like San Francisco, Chicago, New York, and suburbs like it, you'll quickly understand what I mean. Sidewalks present everywhere. California has more defined bike routes where as ours just seem to be thrown together.

The article is also correct that drivers are not used to yielding for pedestrians. I will give you all a quick test to prove this. Go to any stop light in the suburbs and watch a car make a right turn on red. Watch the driver and where he is looking, after ensuring no cars are coming from the left, I will guarantee only 1 of 30 of them will actually look to their RIGHT to check for pedestrians near the crosswalk before turning. Same goes for left turns. They will ensure theres no oncoming traffic but 80% of them WILL turn in front of a pedestrian who has a legit crosswalk signal.

Now there are other causes. J-Walkers, (especially dangerous at night. One of my friends nailed someone J-walking Beaver Ruin Rd in Norcross resulting in a fatality. Their family tried to sue her but the court did not find her guilty.) I also had a run in on Windy Hill Rd at night heading toward Austell Rd. Coming up a hill I couldn't see pedestrians walking against the light until the LAST second. God was with me because I only BARELY evaded making him apart of the pavement by swerving around him.

But I will have to agree Suburban Atlanta is mostly not designed for pedestrians.

Atlantans are much more cognizant of pedestrians than people in Texas.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by ATLTJL

They drive me crazy too.

And that's only going to continue to get worse <UPS/FEDEX>

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Ok. You have suggested it. It has been suggested before. Your strategy of complaining about pedestrians on the internet didn't work. Deaths are still increasing in places relying on "suggestions of using common sense".

Can we now move the discussion towards strategies shown to work, such as redesigning the streets and slowing the cars?

Because the high speed cars are the source of the danger. A drunk person stumbling down the street is only a danger to themselves. A drunk person behind the wheel of a car is a danger to everything and everyone around them.

Okay...so moral of the story: everyone else has to change in order to accommodate selfish pedestrians who are unable to think for themselves and wish to just do whatever they want to do without a care in the world, and subject themselves and everyone else to their dangerous attitude. Got it. Tell me I'm wrong.

[jeoff]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Those don't seem directly related to "looking both ways before crossing the road".

Have you considered that street design / lack of safe places to cross could be more of the source of the correlations you suggest?

I don’t think it is an “either-or” thing. You can recognize human nature, and do your best to correct for it—that means that we should improve street design, while recognizing that some folks will still jaywalk —even if there is a crosswalk less than 20 feet away, and we should limit the amount of a car’s controls are on a bright video screen, while recognizing that some folks will still find a way to text and drive.

[Need4Camaro]

Originally Posted by bu2

Atlantans are much more cognizant of pedestrians than people in Texas.

I wouldn't ever dare walk in Texas with speed limits as high a 70 MPH on surface street roads very similar to what is seen on Peachtree Ind Blvd between Holcomb Bridge and Pleasant Hill in the middle of the suburbs.

[kombuchaluchador]

Originally Posted by samiwas1

Okay...so moral of the story: everyone else has to change in order to accommodate selfish pedestrians who are unable to think for themselves and wish to just do whatever they want to do without a care in the world, and subject themselves and everyone else to their dangerous attitude. Got it. Tell me I'm wrong.

You're wrong.

It's the same with drivers too. Why have speed limits? I'm a safe driver. I can be trusted to maintain a safe speed. Other people though...

Or texting laws.

You always have to change something to accommodate selfish people. Why not try to make driving more dangerous? No one in their right mind would suggest that. Why would you suggest it for pedestrians?

There will always be pedestrians. How would it benefit anyone not to accommodate them. What if you are in their place one day?