Would mandatory licensing change things?

[dannc]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

I probably shouldn’t feed this drift, but a quick search reveals the rate of road traffic fatalities per 100,000 to be:

UNITED STATES 10.04
CANADA 5.26
AUSTRALIA 4.94
FINLAND 3.73
GERMANY 3.54
UNITED KINGDOM 2.58

https://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/...ts/by-country/

But according to this website, the USA is very far from the worst. The top rank, by a huge margin, goes to ZIMBABWE at 75.02 deaths per 100,000.

Actually, according to this database, the most dangerous places to drive are largely concentrated in Africa, the Middle East and the South East.

The problem with those statistics is it is by population which does not measure driving per say. A better measure would be accidents/deaths per mile driven. How many people drive in London, Berlin, New York city or any big city? Those population centers will greatly impact the numbers, especially in lower population and smaller countries.

For instance, London, UK has 8.1 million people out of 66 million in the entire UK. It is 12% of the UK population. New York city is 8.6 million compared to the US population of 327 million. NYC is only 3% of the US population. Comparing by population is not a good measure for driving statistics.

To measure driving issues, the measurement needs to be miles driven. But if one wants to argue that licensing impacts driving accidents/deaths then one has to also look at drunk driving and traffic laws, followed by the enforcement of said laws and violation punishment. If one left out culture, that would be a mistake.

Later,
Dan

[CatNewBee]

Originally Posted by dannc

The problem with those statistics is it is by population which does not measure driving per say. A better measure would be accidents/deaths per mile driven. How many people drive in London, Berlin, New York city or any big city? Those population centers will greatly impact the numbers, especially in lower population and smaller countries.

For instance, London, UK has 8.1 million people out of 66 million in the entire UK. It is 12% of the UK population. New York city is 8.6 million compared to the US population of 327 million. NYC is only 3% of the US population. Comparing by population is not a good measure for driving statistics.

To measure driving issues, the measurement needs to be miles driven. But if one wants to argue that licensing impacts driving accidents/deaths then one has to also look at drunk driving and traffic laws, followed by the enforcement of said laws and violation punishment. If one left out culture, that would be a mistake.

Later,
Dan

... and do not forget how many tourists and foreigners are involved in the incidents, what weather conditions are in the countries, how much transit traffic goes through. Then also take into account what the preferred beverages the drunk drivers have consumed, how many drunk pedestrians were involved, how many bicycles are around, to what percentage motorbikes are involved, what the preferred car brands are in the country and if the crash were intentional etc... Soo many variables. One can think, each casualty is different.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by dannc

The problem with those statistics is it is by population which does not measure driving per say. A better measure would be accidents/deaths per mile driven. How many people drive in London, Berlin, New York city or any big city? Those population centers will greatly impact the numbers, especially in lower population and smaller countries.

For instance, London, UK has 8.1 million people out of 66 million in the entire UK. It is 12% of the UK population. New York city is 8.6 million compared to the US population of 327 million. NYC is only 3% of the US population. Comparing by population is not a good measure for driving statistics.

To measure driving issues, the measurement needs to be miles driven. But if one wants to argue that licensing impacts driving accidents/deaths then one has to also look at drunk driving and traffic laws, followed by the enforcement of said laws and violation punishment. If one left out culture, that would be a mistake.

Later,
Dan

if you purely go off of miles driven the united states will have by far the lowest death rate caused by automobiles of any country with automobiles.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by dannc

The problem with those statistics is it is by population which does not measure driving per say. A better measure would be accidents/deaths per mile driven. ...

All good points. I wasn’t trying to make any definitive statements. These are the stats I could find. I’d welcome you posting the stat: morbidity per kilometre driven. But of course that approach introduces different biases. It doesn’t take into account the differing types of vehicle usage in different regions, different climate, differing enforcement, differing cultural norms (as you said)… One can always find ways to critique these large comparative datasets.

With regard to the Germany rates, it’s true there are few absolute speed limits on highways outside of urban areas. Although apparently there is a general recommendation of not to exceed 130 km/hr.

According to the absolute authority on all things (Wiki)

The German Highway Code says:

Any person driving a vehicle may only drive so fast that the car is under control. Speeds must be adapted to the road, traffic, visibility and weather conditions as well as the personal skills and characteristics of the vehicle and load.

Speed limits are enforced with a small tolerance. Driving merely 3 km/h (2 mph) or faster above the posted or implied speed limit is considered a punishable infraction in Germany. The speeding fines are set by federal law (Bußgeldkatalog, schedule of fines).

******

john61ct wrote: The US in particular is willing to accept huge annual losses of human life in the service of economic profits and individual freedom from government regulation.

John, I don’t see the connection between economic profit and higher accident rates. Seems easy to argue that this would be a drain on economic activity in the form of lost talent, and medical costs — unless you’re saying this generates more “profit” due to the added healthcare services needed…? Hmmmm

As for freedom, yes, as a socialist/conservative/liberal/libertarian I too prefer the freedom to be stupid. But another way to look at freedom is the freedom to stay alive. Driving badly alll too often removes freedom from others — the innocent ones who get killed due to bad drivers.

[Singularity]

Originally Posted by dannc

To measure driving issues, the measurement needs to be miles driven. But if one wants to argue that licensing impacts driving accidents/deaths then one has to also look at drunk driving and traffic laws, followed by the enforcement of said laws and violation punishment. If one left out culture, that would be a mistake.

You are advocating for systematic methodological meta-analysis incorporating seemingly disparate statistics across multiple disciplines over space and time to come to a sound and reasonable conclusion that improves safety and ultimately health?

What does this have anything to do preventing accidents?

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by newhaul

if you purely go off of miles driven the united states will have by far the lowest death rate caused by automobiles of any country with automobiles.

I’d love to see that data. Have a source NH?

[Singularity]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

I’d love to see that data. Have a source NH?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ted_death_rate

Doesn't agree with previous general assertion.

Most imaginable statistic can be googled quickly "XX per YY per ZZ on Fridays vs Tuesdays." If you think about a statistic that might have any utility...with 7 billion people on the planet...there's a good chance others have as well and have done at least some preliminary numbers.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

I’d love to see that data. Have a source NH?

the rate for the United States for 2017 was 1.25 deaths per 100 million miles driven
https://www.insurancejournal.com/new.../16/480956.htm

[Mike OReilly]

Thanks folks — ask and ye shall receive

The Wiki data seems consisted with your source NH. Unfortunately this source only includes the distance-driven number for a small subset of all the countries. But they all appear to be so-called ‘first world’ developed countries (except perhaps Mexico).

Looking at this subset, the USA death rate is still higher than most.

… maybe it’s because people don’t know how to use 4-way stop intersections .

[transmitterdan]

Don’t forget that there are millions of unlicensed drivers in the US. And many of them are on the road every day. Just sayin...

[Cpt Pat]

Originally Posted by dannc

The problem with those statistics is it is by population which does not measure driving per say. A better measure would be accidents/deaths per mile driven. How many people drive in London, Berlin, New York city or any big city? Those population centers will greatly impact the numbers, especially in lower population and smaller countries.

For instance, London, UK has 8.1 million people out of 66 million in the entire UK. It is 12% of the UK population. New York city is 8.6 million compared to the US population of 327 million. NYC is only 3% of the US population. Comparing by population is not a good measure for driving statistics.

To measure driving issues, the measurement needs to be miles driven. But if one wants to argue that licensing impacts driving accidents/deaths then one has to also look at drunk driving and traffic laws, followed by the enforcement of said laws and violation punishment. If one left out culture, that would be a mistake.

Later,
Dan

I'm not surprised to see Sweden having one of the lowest fatality rates. I lived and worked there. To qualify for a license, I needed a full physical exam by a doctor, and a practical test including driving around pylons on what amounted to an ice rink.

The Swedes practically laughed at my California license.

And if they caught you driving under the influence -- they locked you up and threw away the key. There was major and intense involvement by "the government" in driver safety and certification. Oh, and, the license cost a lot more than here in the US. But you get what you pay for: fewer idiots with whom you shared the road.

If someone is trying to draw comparisons between driving and sailing safety, we need numbers for sailing with which we can compare. Please also include comparative costs to taxpayers for rescues - excluding costs paid by private insurance. We taxpayers pick up 100% of the costs for Coast Guard rescues. And here in California coastal waters, the Coast Guard stays very busy pulling fools out of their own mistakes.

I'd also like to hear from some Brits on their opinion of (unlicensed) American seamanship. I've read the newspaper articles with headlines to the tune of: "Yet another American sailor rescued," and heard the jokes, but I'd like to hear from the source.

[Singularity]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Looking at this subset, the USA death rate is still higher than most.

… maybe it’s because people don’t know how to use 4-way stop intersections .

Or because they didn't have a license...

"Overall, 18.2% of fatal crashes involved a driver who was unlicensed or invalidly licensed; these crashes resulted in the deaths of 21,049 people."

http://www.adtsea.org/Resources%20PDF%27s/AAA%202011%20Unlicensed%20to%20Kill.pdf

It would seem that the de-licensing program in the US is not adequately effective at eliminating injuries/fatalities.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Singularity

Or because they didn't have a license...

"Overall, 18.2% of fatal crashes involved a driver who was unlicensed or invalidly licensed; these crashes resulted in the deaths of 21,049 people."

http://www.adtsea.org/Resources%20PDF%27s/AAA%202011%20Unlicensed%20to%20Kill.pdf

It would seem that the de-licensing program in the US is not adequately effective at eliminating injuries/fatalities. An engineer-type would probably not recommend better licensing as the remedy.

Ah, but for this to be a factor, the rates of unlicensed driving activity must be different in different countries. So we’d need to know this stat.

Fun, fun…

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Thanks folks — ask and ye shall receive

The Wiki data seems consisted with your source NH. Unfortunately this source only includes the distance-driven number for a small subset of all the countries. But they all appear to be so-called ‘first world’ developed countries (except perhaps Mexico).

Looking at this subset, the USA death rate is still higher than most.

… maybe it’s because people don’t know how to use 4-way stop intersections .

IMO the numbers are for way off that only comes to 3.2 billion miles per year in the USA
The commercial trucking industry racks up an estimated 140 billion miles per year.
https://hdstruckdrivinginstitute.com...rucks-numbers/

100 million miles / 1.25 deaths x 40k deaths per year = 3.2 billion miles

[Singularity]

There needs to be mandatory licensing in statistics to use/operate statistics. This would change things.

Agreed cost to taxpayer should be a concern, dare I say almost the only concern (if/when considering about the long-term viability of the whole activity). Citizens don't care, ultimately, if other citizens off themselves doing "dangerous or foolish" things. They just don't want to have to pay for the cleanup or the bickering in the 'rich people' hobby.