Do the phones have guns…?
Tl;dr
USA:
- Terrible drivers
- Big ass trucks
- Minor punishments
- No sidewalks
- Texting while driving
Europe:
- Reasonably decent drivers
- Moderately big vehicles
- More or less severe punishments (still too low)
- Sidewalks everywhere
- Texting while driving
Road design also matters. European roads with heavy pedestrian traffic are often too narrow for speeding or have obstacles. American roads often look like a high way and only the signaling may suggest otherwise.
Is there any evidence that Europeans are better drivers than Americans? I’m not saying you’re wrong, I’ve just never seen any kind of data about that.
Also I’m not sure where you got the idea that the US doesn’t have sidewalks.
Casual observer here but i noticed a significant drop in cars in europe. People walk or mass transit. I’m sure there are stats for it but in a city where walking is 1st, people just pay attention more. Americans… will drive 2 blocks to the store and need to text BFF Jane about the latest tictok
Probably because those massive gender affirming trucks are death machines for pedestrians
I wonder what the deaths per pedestrian mile stat is for America vs the rest of the world. I would expect it it be even more terrifying. Ouside cities I am used to pedestrians being an extremely rare sight unless in a parking lot.
Probably no one single cause. Bigger vehicles. Wider roads. More driving centric. Less give a shit about other people.
People DO get killed because of phone usage in other countries. It is a huge issue. There’s now even special cameras here for fining people that call. Unfortunately many people text and drive. I constantly see people look down their laps while driving.
Lots of good reasons here on laws and larger vehicles in the US. One thing that seems to be missing:
Wider streets & roads, prevalence of stroads => faster driving speeds => more pedestrian deaths.
A lot of cities in Europe are much safer by design because of narrow streets that force drivers to slow down. Europe also has more real roads as opposed to stroads which are pervasive in the U.S.
Well european roads are mostly narrower because they were build 600 years ago
Ok so the thing is, when you get hit by small car you usually tend to roll over the top w some injuries. You can’t really do that when its a giant truck/SUV the height of you and you end up rolling under their BIGASS SUSPENDED VEHICLE
There are very harsh fines for driving with a phone elsewhere. And smaller vehicles and better infra for pedestrians.
From what I’m seeing here in Europe, the fines for driving with a phone are seldom applied and outside a handful of countries aren’t even that large.
Also infrastructure for pedestrians hasn’t actually improved significativelly in Europe since 2009 - the big difference in the quality of pedestrian infrastructure between Europe and the US comes all the way back from the 60s or even earlier, so it doens’t explain a change of trend on the US but not Europe in 2009.
I’m leaning more towards the “oversized light trucks are dangerous as fuck” theory since, well, they are and the trend to see more of those on the road hasn’t happened in Europe but it has in the US.
Regarding pedestrian infrastructure. That is just outright false, at least for Austria. Pedestrian infrastructure in big cities has improved substantially and even in rural regions many communities have made improvements. Many of these projects happened also after 2009.
That said, the rise of oversized trucks is likely the bigger factor here. When I was visiting the US in 2010, it was not half as bad as it appears to be now.
I’ve lived in Britain, Germany and Portugal during the period since 2009 and saw no big improvements in pedestrian infrastructure beyond a few streets being closed to traffic and turned fully pedestrianised.
The biggest change I saw was improved infrastructure for cycling, rather than for pedestrians.
Paris and Vienna certainly had a lot going on in this regard since 2009. (Brussels too) I am not talking about the odd pedestrianisation.
A lot of streets have been redesigned, that has often benefitted both, pedestrians and cyclists and added more greenery and trees.
I thought big trucks and SUVs were doing it - at least that’s what a different headline said.
SUVs don’t kill people, but phones apparently do
So a good guy with an SUV can stop a bad guy with a phone? I think im getting it
Since it’s a US-only phenomenon, looking at vehicle types popular in the US seems like a good starting place, but that assumes phone use affects people’s awareness of their surroundings uniformly - I would want to confirm that by ruling out cultural differences between countries.
Big Trucks and SUVs are much deadlier than proper cars in case of accidents. Pedestrian infrastructure does not exist in most parts of the US or is very dangerous to use and those parts of the US that do are often unaffordable for regular people to live in. People also do not expect pedestrians even if there is infrastructure of that kind. Roads in the US are designed to maximise the danger to pedestrians even if there is pedestrian infrastructure because of car first regulations …
We have pedestrian friendly infrastructure and we don’t drive penis size compensating trucks. Cars close to pedestrians are forced to go slow and if they would swivel off the road, the curbs and other stuff like trees are there to stop cars before they hit anyone, or force the wheels away from the sidewalks to steer the car back on the road. So even when people are dumb enough to be on their phone, the risk of a fatal accident with a pedestrian is limited. Giant trucks just ram over and through everything, splashing any pedestrian in their path. Especially if there aren’t any sidewalks and cars are allowed to drive really fast. Contrary to the US we actually value human lives so we built our cities to be safe for bikes and pedestrians.
and cars are allowed to drive really fast
That was stated very plainly here. Cars are getting bigger and heavier. And pedestrians being killed equals weight of car multiplied with speed. Weight up, so speed down. Small roads everywhere now 30kph/20mph.
All fair points and true, but those trucks are still a sizable minority on the road. I think the infrastructure and low speeds are the main reasons
Include SUVs in your computation and rerun the numbers. Yes, the big fuck off trucks are still a minority, but they push everything bigger the bigger they get. And bigger is the only thing they’re getting.
I drive a MINI, bought it in 2018. Then, I was comfortably in the majority of car sizes (new minis are comfortable hatchbacks). Now, there’s maybe 10% of cars that I’m comparable to, everything else has windows with bottoms that are at or above my roofline.
I think the number of large trucks on the road is very dependent on location. I’m in the Deep South, and they are everywhere. I’m actually one of only two people at my job who don’t have a giant truck. The other is my boss. Coincidentally, we are also the only two women who work here. She’s got an older minivan, and my car is 15 years old. Oh wait, one guy drives his girlfriend’s Jeep. I forgot about him.
It’s a combination. And even though those trucks might be a minority on the road in the US, the percentage of those monstrosities is still more compared to in europe. Over here they are a rarity. I bet if you compare those percentages to the percentages of accidents with fatalities that you see a similarity.
Yeah I’m pretty sure this is why https://vger.to/lemmy.today/post/55397665
Maybe, but it’s probably a lot more to do with infrastructure. European drivers are used to pedestrians being everywhere, North American’s aren’t.
It would be interesting to see a comparison between cities and rural locations.
Screenshot for compatibility reasons on fedi. So that it’s loud and fucking clear
https://lemmy.today/post/55397665
I wonder why voyager does this?
I’m on Voyager, for me the both links open properly
Settings > General > Other > Share Links
I’m not sure what you mean. I don’t use voyager, and find it to be off putting that voyager would share a link in such a way that is essentially an ad for itself.
I shared the direct link for the rest of us 🙂 it doesn’t seem that ! is needed anymore.
They are telling Voyager users how to modify that setting. We have options, but apparently the default is a Voyager specific link.
Interesting choice by Voyager. But it is nice that there are apps available for fediverse users who want them!
While Voyager is a nice app, that’s offputting for me as well. Just changed it! Glad I didn’t share a link yet.
Thanks! I didn’t realize we could change that.
Sorry to be like this, but what is this link?
I get redircted outside of my Lemmy App (because it is a 3rd party URL) and then get advertised a Lemmy client, which I don’t even like, only for its page to only show a preview and in order to actually view the linked post I have to open the original WebUI of the Lemmy instance linked on the advertising page of voyager?
And it got the balls to tell me that its the best experience?
What the fuck Voyager??
I think @Zarxrax@lemmy.world is using the rich text editor, this is a bug already fixed in the latest version. Voyager is supposed to unwrap vger.to links on paste.
seems to be an issue on your end:
also on voyager and it’s working as expected!
click link > opens post within voyager
maybe a settings issue or a bug?
Voyager made this website and probably added these URLs as supported links.
I am not on voyager, but on thunder and it does not work, since there links are not the standard share link. I tested using normal links in a comment and it works there.
So while in theory Thunder could add support for these Links, I really just whished that Voyager would stop advertising themselves whenever somebody shares a link with their client.
The actions of Voyager seem malicious; no other Lemmy (or mastodon client) that I know of does not directly link to the post in question and rather just advertises itself like an adfly page.
It’s a bug already fixed, vger.to links should always unwrap on paste into a comment or post!
oh, sry, i read that wrong!
yes, that’s a voyager link, although that should probably open in the browser version by default, since voyager, afaik, does have a web version…
fyi: it’s not malice, there’s actually a good reason for generating these links!
it’s so different instances can be shared through the same home instance, i.e.: so i can share a link from feddit.org with someone on lemmy.world, and they can still access it within the same client, through their own home instance without requiring a new login, etc.
it’s a limitation of lemmy and voyager offers a workaround ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Kind of?
It’s not just that the outside of the vehicles are big.
The inside is too, so a lot of people can barely see over the dash on the best of days, so glancing down at a phone means taking their eyes fully off the road. In a sedan they’d at least maintain a periphery view of the road, which allows for unconscious sight and reactions.
Like how “daredevil blindness” is real and some people are blind but will duck if you throw a wrench at their head.
The A pillars (the pillar between the windshield and driver/passenger door window) have gotten so massive due to airbag requirements that it blocks a significant view angle. It used to be that they were an inch wide.
I’d rather have the airbag and have to move my head a bit to see than not have the bags. Surely driving instructors teach students that it is a blindspot of a sort and that you should keep it in mind, no?
I’ll agree that its a good component to have. I couldn’t say about driving instructors, for me that was about 25 years ago when I was driving a car from the early 90s that had the thinner pillars. I keep my head on a swivel while driving, but just as easily I’ve had a car or pedestrian pop up that I don’t see right off the bat in that blind spot, especially turning at an intersection.
Yeah. Some intersections are hard. I go through one daily that has a bike lane with a green light to cross a street while my turn rightinto that street light is also green. That means bikers may be aproaching from behind me at a weird angle, i hate that one. It is a balancing act I guess, safety for the driver and passengers vs visibility. Though nowadays you have all the new tech with sensors and cameras and the car basically yells at you that you’re going to hit something so I guess that is not terrible.
IMO that is sheer incompetence on the part of the traffic engineer who designed it.
I agree, but remaking it is probably too expensive for the town sadly. It has been complained about
Surely driving instructors teach students that it is a blindspot of a sort and that you should keep it in mind, no?
Drivers Ed is a month for a teenager or a handful of lessons…
The only thing I remember from drivers Ed was when another student was told to turn right up ahead, replied “yep” and then just didn’t do it.
When the instructed asked why not, the kid accelerated and said he didn’t want to turn.
Scary as fuck. But everything else I was told decades ago I can’t remember.
And that’s not even getting into how much vehicles have changed in the last couple decades. Especially when the topic involves the continued increase in size in trucks…
You think a boomer remembers what they were told in the 1980s during drivers Ed and will be able to extrapolate the changes to modern vehicles on their own?
Quick edit:
Besides all that, you’re putting a distracted drivers “safety” after hitting a pedestrian in a giant truck over them being able to not hit a pedestrian.
You know what’s safer for a driver? An Abrams tank.
Your line of logic is literally why trucks keep getting bigger and why were in this fucking mess
Woah, relax. I didn’t mention a thing about careless drivers hitting pedestrians, or trucks. I was just pointing out that airbags overall are good, even if you’re supposed to put a little extra effort while driving.
This is like if someone said smoking crack in an elementary school is bad…
And you said it’s important for people to relax sometimes.
What you said was fine in isolation, just not in the context of the discussion you wandered into and didn’t understand
Ok. I literally responded to the a-pillar comment, but it’s fine. I don’t wnt to engage further, thnks for your insights.
Different countries i guess. Driving lessons last a while over here, and there is an actual test at the end of it that is very easy to fail. But I understand your point and agree with what you’re saying about the drivers not appreciating the differences between then and now.
Read the room, son! Like, I’m a nonviolent old lady and even I felt a momentary impulse to throw wrenches at blind people. Lotta lemmings with even more impulsivity than me.
I find it frustrating that the same author wrote both of these articles, published one day apart, but made no connections between them.
Edit: I couldn’t read earlier…
What do you mean? The second sentence mentions their previous article
I have no excuses! Thank you for pointing this out. Not sure what my issue was earlier.
I had thought the same thing. I can only assume the site is farming for clicks.
Oversized designs is definitely a big one, but don’t forget subpar training and verification of said training (take a driving test once and your set for life) and of course just overall poor design.
I’ve got a Lincoln mkx and it can be almost impossible to even see out of the windshield on sunny days due to the angle of the windshield catching massive reflections of the dash (like how the hell did that make it past testing)
Vw tiguan rear view mirror goes lower than my shoulders, blockng half the front view.
Since the article clearly states that even Canada—where we drive the same vehicles and have some similar infrastructure issues—isn’t showing the same uptick, the most likely reasons are legal/regulatory or cultural rather than physical. In other words, there’s more going on here than just oversized SUVs with bad collision outcomes for pedestrians (although they certainly don’t help).
In Canada our distracted driving laws are pretty harsh and they do actually enforce them. Insurance is also mandatory and a distracted driving ticket is very expensive for a couple of years.
Where are people getting the idea that insurance isn’t mandatory in the US?
You kind of do everything the opposite way of developed countries
It’s very much mandatory. You’re correct that the US does some bullshit, but that isn’t part of it.
There’s plenty of low hanging fruit. You don’t need to come up with lies in order to punch down.
Apparently New Hampshire doesn’t have Mandatory Insurance.
Florida doesn’t mandate insurance. There’s probably a few other
shitholeRepublican states that are similar and I’m just not aware.
Where in Canada are police doing their jobs? Not in Ontario.
Insurance is mandatory…but many are driving without it as some idiot in Ontario got rid of visible licence validation in 2018.
BC. Sometimes the police wait at the stop light about 50 feet up, and walk down the side of the cars to check if you are on your phone while light is red.
I have seen it in Ontario and Quebec. They do it with seatbelt check campaigns. I have never seen it in Toronto though but in Toronto I don’t think you can even get pulled over for a moving violation anyways, unless you are speeding exceptionally fast.
My hypothesis is that the rise in distracted driving was just as bad in European countries but they have safer infrastructure that limits cars’ speed and otherwise protects pedestrians, and I think that could be tested by looking at the rates of car crashes overall in Europe (if those went up at the same time as the US without a corresponding rise in dead pedestrians I think that’d suggest their infrastructure is the difference)
Speed isn’t really a factor here, as many European speed limits are higher than US ones, but there is at leaat some separation between vehicles and pedestrians. It’s not rocket science - vehicles and fleshy water bags don’t mix well
