Austin's ranks low in "Allstate America’s Best Drivers Report" (Houston: construction, safest)

[CptnRn]

It appears the nomination suggested for "everyone in Austin" for the worst drivers in Austin thread may have been right.

Nominations for Worst Drivers in Austin

In this Allstate report Austin ranked 179 out of 193 cities, you are 43.5% more likely to have a collision in Austin when compared to the national average. The typical driver goes 7 years between collisions. And we have gotten worse since 2003 when the average was 7.5 years.

The Report

For the past five years, Allstate actuaries have conducted an in-depth analysis of company claim data to determine the likelihood drivers in America's 200 largest cities will experience a vehicle collision compared to the national average. Internal property damage reported claims were analyzed over a two-year period (from January 2006 to December 2007) to ensure the findings would not be impacted by external influences such as weather or road construction.

A weighted average of the two-year numbers determined the annual percentages. The report defines an auto crash as any collision resulting in a property damage claim. Allstate's auto policies represent about 11.3 percent of all U.S. auto policies, making this report a realistic snapshot of what's happening on America's roadways.

Link to the data (http://allstatenewsroom.com/documents/423;download?src=L2NhdGVnb3JpZXMvNi9yZWxlYXNlcy80N TI5%0A - broken link)

Other places in Texas rated Brownsville 23, McAllen 39, Lubbock 44, Laredo 59, El Paso 75, Amarillo 79, Corpus 89, Pasadena 124, Ft. Worth 123, Waco 138, Houston 161, Plano 162, Grand Prairie 165, Carlton 166, Mesquite 167, San Antonio 168, Dallas 174, Arlington 177, Garland 178, Irving 183.

The only places in the nation worse then Austin were:

Hialeah, FL 180 212,217 44.1% 7.2 6.9 -0.3
Paterson, NJ 181 146,545 45.2% 6.8 6.9 0.1
Jersey City, NJ 182 242,389 46.0% 6.8 6.9 0.1
Irving, TX 183 199,505 46.6% 7.8 6.8 -1
Los Angeles, CA 184 3,834,340 46.6% 7.2 6.8 -0.4
San Francisco, CA 185 764,976 52.4% 6.6 6.6 0
Providence, RI 186 172,459 52.8% 6.4 6.5 0.1
Elizabeth, NJ 187 124,862 53.0% 5.7 6.5 0.8
Philadelphia, PA 188 1,449,634 57.1% 6.8 6.4 -0.4
Newark, NJ 189 280,135 60.7% 5.3 6.2 0.9
Hartford, CT 190 124,563 62.4% 8.4 6.2 -2.2
Glendale, CA 191 196,979 75.2% 6.3 5.7 -0.6
Baltimore, MD 192 637,455 80.1% 6.5 5.6 -0.9
Washington, DC 193 588,292 95.4% 5.2 5.1 -0.1

Here is the rest of the press release. Allstate Newsroom - News Release Archives - Fifth Annual "Allstate America's Best Drivers Reportâ„¢" Reveals Which Cities Have the Safest Drivers (http://www.allstatenewsroom.com./releases/4529-fifth-annual-allstate-america - broken link)

[CarnivalGal]

That's a shocker.

[iceshots]

Its all of those speeding drivers in the left lane running into the slow drivers in the left lane, while both are talking on their cells phones!!!

[austinite45]

Texas is widely recognized as the worst state when it comes to driving.

Austin is the state capital. Got to be a "good" representative of the state.

Good to know that there are better drivers elsewhere in the country.

[joejitsu]

I don't think people in Austin are bad drivers so much as the infrastructure can't support the number of driver's on the road. The roads are just too crowded, which increases the chances of a mistake happening. All the crowding creates road rage. Also if you want to drink at night Austin has extremley bad public transportation so lots of drunk drivers on the road.

[austinite45]

Originally Posted by joejitsu

I don't think people in Austin are bad drivers so much as the infrastructure can't support the number of driver's on the road. The roads are just too crowded, which increases the chances of a mistake happening. All the crowding creates road rage. Also if you want to drink at night Austin has extremley bad public transportation so lots of drunk drivers on the road.

I see. so drunk drivers are not bad drivers?

and Austin's bad, pot-hole-ridden roads have been the cause of collisions?

[joejitsu]

I implied that drunk drivers are one of the reasons for Austin's bad rating, thus making them bad drivers. Also when did I say that Austin had pot-hole-ridden roads? The problem with Austin's infrastructure isn't that its in poor condition, but that its not big enough for the number of residents. You shouldn't jump to crazy assumptions.

[inthecut]

Originally Posted by joejitsu

I don't think people in Austin are bad drivers so much as the infrastructure can't support the number of driver's on the road. The roads are just too crowded, which increases the chances of a mistake happening. All the crowding creates road rage. Also if you want to drink at night Austin has extremley bad public transportation so lots of drunk drivers on the road.

Exactly...a combination of a few things..."BAD" is a negative connotation, which is just shorthand for a combination of factors, road infrastructure being near the top....also, another factor right up there is the % of new people in Austin, feeling out the roads/areas......horrible signage is another issue, along with the locating of a large amount of retail on I-35 frontage roads, with tons of people trying to get on the interstate exit at once........

That stat is something else, though....

[joejitsu]

Originally Posted by inthecut

also, another factor right up there is the % of new people in Austin, feeling out the roads/areas......horrible signage is another issue, along with the locating of a large amount of retail on I-35 frontage roads, with tons of people trying to get on the interstate exit at once........

That stat is something else, though....

I noticed these things too. Whenever I am driving on I35 I notice that people will be on far left lane and all the sudden swerve over to get on Research, or an exit. It happens so much. The only thing I can figure is that they are new drivers.

The only reason I never wreck on I35 is I assume the worst out of every driver and act accordingly.

[austinite45]

Originally Posted by joejitsu

I implied that drunk drivers are one of the reasons for Austin's bad rating, thus making them bad drivers.

Good. but that seems to be inconsistent with your earlier statement ...

I don't think people in Austin are bad drivers so much as the infrastructure can't support the number of driver's on the road.

the above statement implies the infrastructure was to blame, not the drivers, right?

Also when did I say that Austin had pot-hole-ridden roads?

You didn't. It's in the papers and on TV news.

The problem with Austin's infrastructure isn't that its in poor condition, but that its not big enough for the number of residents.

there is a problem with this argument: LA has far higher car density than Austin, and where is LA on the list?

You shouldn't jump to crazy assumptions.

me or you?