The thing that surprised me most after moving to Oregon was how bad the drivers were. I've lived in many states across the South, the Midwest, and West Coast and I've never encountered drivers so consistently vindictive, entitled and reckless as the drivers in Oregon.
Mildly Interesting
This is for strictly mildly interesting material. If it's too interesting, it doesn't belong. If it's not interesting, it doesn't belong.
This is obviously an objective criteria, so the mods are always right. Or maybe mildly right? Ahh.. what do we know?
Just post some stuff and don't spam.
The fact that California, a state with THIRTEEN TIMES MORE PEOPLE than Mississippi, has less than half the number of traffic fatalities is mind blowing. Mississippi is just 30% of the landmass that California represents, and yet it gets more than double the amount of traffic fatalities.
Looking at the left side of the graph, the trend is easily recognizable. Drunk angry and repressed, poverty stricken republicans will drive drunk like it's the right to bear arms. The further right you go, the more democratic the state.
I assume this includes pedestrians and cyclist deaths? It's by population rather than by "car" or "km driven" but I'd like to see a per county breakdown.
Oh come on. I don’t think there’s another country on the planet as car-dependent as the US. We have more cars, we drive far, far more than these countries, so of course there will be more deaths. Try it per person/mile driven and I bet the numbers shift quite a bit and it won’t be so dramatic, but the US will still come out “ahead.” On average I’d also bet the US has far higher average travel speed as well generating a higher possibility of fatal accidents.
Edit: Here. Sort by billion km driven. US is #8.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate
Still high, but in context the OP doesn’t offer.
Oh come on. I don’t think there’s another country on the planet as car-dependent as the US.
Well, that in and of itself is something worthy of criticism. One significant side effect of being so car-dependent is that effectively requires us to have low standards when it comes to obtaining and keeping a license.
Canada and Australia, the only other countries in the OP, are both below the US.
As for speed, at least where I am in Canada, they don't even bother enforcing the limit until you're at least 20% over it. And Germany, famous for its highway without a speed limit, is still lower than all three countries listed.
Whatever is going on in the US to cause a higher amount of car fatalities isn't just distance driven or speed.
You ignored the entire point of the post. Your anecdote about enforcement could be apply to any of the countries listed. And the idea that the Autobahn is some kind of speed free-for-all needs to die. It’s highly regulated and restricted. I’ve driven it well over 100mph. Again, the number of Germans driving and the miles they drive vs that of the US is a huge difference.
Yeah but that chart accounted for deaths per distance driven and the bit about speed enforcement and the autobahn was to challenge your assumption that people in the US drive faster on average because people here speed so much they have to be exceeding the limit by a good amount before the cops even blink at them.
Your anecdote. Don’t confuse your personal feelings about enforcement with actual data.
That's part of the problem.
„Yeah, it's unfair to count us that high in death by alcohol. You should divide it by litre of alcohol drank.“ - said no-one ever, with good reason.
Took a closer look to see if I was surprised by any correlation about poverty, and browsed away with the belief that the south is still a shithole... which might still correlate with poverty. I think kansas/oregon is the first entry that wouldn't be 'south.'
Drinkin' beers an' drivin' yer trukk is a highly traditional pastime in the US deep south. Typically done in the middle of the night, in my experience, for the maximum probability of contacting the local wildlife or making friends at high speed with a tree.
How you know this is good data
- No sources. Just a chart.
- Randomly compares some places in North American to some places in Australia.
New Jersey is too low. Serious doubts about the validity of this table.
It's comparing against total population, not driving population, so any amount of mass transit will greatly reduce this number
Jersey is best state, 100%.
Probably not. The state has been implementing Vision Zero as a statewide program along with several cities.
The two major highways have lower than average accidents due to design.
One of the state's signature traffic configurations, the Jersey Jughandle, eliminates left turn movements on older highways, a major source of accidents.
Where are Idaho, Wyoming and Montana?
There are only 36 states represented here by my count. It says "major" states, whatever that means. But 14 in total are missing either because of their smaller populations, or because their fatality rate is low enough that they would fall off the right hand side of the chart and thus wouldn't fit the "America Drivers Bad" narrative quietly being implied, here.
Edit: I looked up the numbers for my state in the same year (and no, I'm not telling the public which one). We would be at 1.2 on this chart if my math is correct, which is well below even the shortest bar for Victoria, there.
I decided to look and found that this metric is almost always measured by vehicle distance travelled rather than by population. Basically the graph OP shared is useless and meant to support a narrative, as you stated.
SOUTH CAROLINA #2!!!! 🥳🥳🎉🎊🎉🎉🎊🍻🥳🎉🎉🪅
I'd like to see the % of trucks vs cars for each location.
The south is killing it!
Not surprised by SC, as a Canadian I had one accident in 40 years of driving, it was in SC, caused by a 17yo girl driving an old suburban or something.