I know, that's why I never will, it'll kill me
I hear you, and like I said in my past posts, seatbelts and helmets should be a personal choice. But bold, self-empowering words don't put food on your child's table when you're dead. You may not fear for your person much, but the people who depend on you might. Simple things like strapping on a seatbelt, or wearing a helmet while riding will help to save your life if you're involved in a collision. I'm not advocating some cliche, Orwellian world, but was simply trying to point out why laws have taken shape over the years. But.....to get back on the original topic of this thread.......new cars are safer than old ones.....(but the old ones do look better in my opinion).Now I can see how Idiocracy the real life version gets started. Dysgenics. We have to protect the stupid from themselves. The fat from food, the lazy from work and the thrill seeker from himself. Way too boring a life for me. Leave me out.
The lawsuits are something entirely different that are in fact caused by the Nanny State letting crazy lawsuits go forward and stupid people on juries. It becomes a vicious cycle.
They even include pedestrians, bicyclists and unknowns in the total vehicle fatalities. That means the people didn't even have to be in the car to be counted.
And yet when you get into the statistics broken down by type of accident, we find that many more people were killed back in 1950 by trains .45 versus about .07 per 100M miles traveled. See back then they didn't have safety things like railroad crossing arms etc. You also need to take into account numerous other differences in driving today as opposed to back then. How many traffic lights were around back then as opposed to today? About 1,000 times more today. Today there are stop signs or stoplights at just about every major intersection. They were very sparse back then and thus increased your chances of getting in an accident. I won't even mention paved roads and sidewalks, if they included motorcycles in the total, drinking and driving was more prevalent back then etc. etc. I am surprised it isn't higher.
However, the first link only goes back to the early 1990s and the second link gives little detailed information......
The fact that they even got these statistics 17 years before the DOT was even established is suspect. How did they get the numbers of miles traveled etc? Who reported it and did people report it accurately? Was the data estimated?
It makes complete sesne that there was a record low of traffic accidents in 2009, 2010 or 2011. People drive less in a depressed economy because they cannot afford to travel. I would be surprised if it were higher.
They even include pedestrians, bicyclists and unknowns in the total vehicle fatalities. That means the people didn't even have to be in the car to be counted. " .
That is what they invented life insurance for.
Good luck in your neon.
That is what they invented life insurance for.
Good luck in your neon.
, how do people feel about the destruction of what was then considered old cars in Films(Movies) and TV for entertainment value?
With a lot of sympathy aimed at the destruction of this car, and it was only a 4 door, not exactly a collectors dream
Chinatown has a famous scene where a 1935? Ford is driven into a tree? It wasn't fake and the owner would not sell the car to the studio so they paid to fix it. Dukes of Hazard, just how many 68-69 Dodge Chargers were written off. American Grafitti, 3 1955 Chevrolets were used, The racer, the crasher and the burner, and I have just watched an episode of The Fall Guy in which a 1960 Pontiac was heavily rear ended.
if you saw any of these when they were fresh, what did you think? "Oh No they just smashed up that Charger", Ford Pontiac or whatever. Or were they just old cars.
"I am surprised it isn't higher.
Such are still counted, when a motor vehicle of any kind is involved.
"The fact that they even got these statistics 17 years before the DOT was even established is suspect.?"
The summary clearly states their source;"1950-1974: National Center for Health Statistics, HEW and State Accident Summaries (adjusted to 30 day Traffic Deaths by NHTSA); FARS 1975-2008 (Final); 2009 Annual Report File (ARF); Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT): Federal Highway Administration"
Lest you also question the pedigree of the Federal Highway Administration, it traces its roots to the Office of Road Inquiry, established by Congress in '93. In '05 that organization's name was changed to the Office of Public Roads in the Agriculture Dept. The name was changed again to the Bureau of Public Roads in '15 and to the Public Roads Administration in '39. Now known as the PRA, it was then shifted to the Federal Works Agency which was subsequently abolished in '49, at which time the name of this office reverted to Bureau of Public Roads, but now it was part of the Department of Commerce rather than agriculture. In '67 the functions of the Bureau of Public Roads were transferred to the FHWA.
"How did they get the numbers of miles traveled etc? "
According to references to earlier iterations of these statistics in "World's Work" and the "Review of Reviews", from state road departments, state Health Departments, motor vechicle resistration bureaus, and the predecessor organisations of the FHWA, same as today.
"It makes complete sesne that there was a record low of traffic accidents in 2009, 2010 or 2011. People drive less in a depressed economy because they cannot afford to travel. I would be surprised if it were higher."
How about 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, et cetera? In each year there were fewer fatalities than in the previous year.
Modern cars are simply safer. Period
Knowing that, I still choose to drive my Ford, which EVEN IN ITS DAY was considered to be a mite dicey as to safety.
But at least I do not attempt to delude myself.
I've installed bronze thrust washers in the rear end, had the wheels re-spoked, installed a wiper, rear-view mirrors, brake light(s), a strobe and Rocky Mountain Brakes, but if I'm hit, I'll have a pretty bad time of it.
)
