Red state, blue state divide reflected in grim statistic: fatal traffic accidents

page: 1
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 07:09 AM
link   

Red state, blue state divide reflected in grim statistic: fatal traffic accidents


ope nchannel.nbcnews.com

The nation’s red and blue states often are miles apart in social attitudes and, of course, in political outlook.

It turns out that they also divide into distinct camps when it comes to a grimmer measure -- fatal traffic accidents.

To an extent that mystifies safety experts and other observers, federal statistics show that people in red states are more likely to die in road crashes. The least deadly states – those with the fewest crash deaths per 100,000 people -- overwhelmingly are blue.

(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 07:09 AM
link   
OK, a bit short of earth-shattering events unfolding in this report but I do find it interesting the statistics break down this way. The red state, those typically thought of as having stricter laws and enforcement, a prevalent morality, and supposedly people conducting themselves with greater sense and restraint, it just seems odd they have a higher vehicle fatality rate. Driving our cars is perhaps the moments when we are exercising our greatest deal of responsibility and under control of our most lethal daily tool we utilize in our modern society. Why might the red areas be less safe?

Does the "Law and Order" climate of red states place the nanny watch over us to the extent we just don't look after ourselves as carefully? Or are they generally the more independent social structure and caution is just thrown to the wind? My own observation has led me to believe that when we live in a society that spends less resources watching over us we in turn do a greater amount of watching over ourselves. True or not?



ope nchannel.nbcnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 07:15 AM
link   
Who needs safety and restraint when god controls everything. If god wants you to die in a car it doesnt matter if you speed or not.

Living idaho i see teenagers losing intrest in school because their parents tell them science is a tool of satan. They self-destruct at night and then go to church the next day to be forgiven.

Maybe.....


+20 more 
posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 07:17 AM
link   
Those "red" states are much bigger and far more rural than the "blue" states.

Which means long unpaved and unlight and poorly marked roads.

Those "blue" states are largely urban with high population densities. Any driving that's done there if at all is stop and go at 10mph.

Laws and enforcement have nothing to do with it. My state has no cell phone law or seatbelt law for adults yet we have higher rates of seatbelt wearing and fewer distracted driving deaths than MA.
edit on 20-11-2012 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 07:20 AM
link   
Whoa there, Out of Context.

Did anyone bother correlating the % rates per capita in blue states for public transportation or for car ownership or licensing % rates per capita?

These stats are misleading because the whole picture is not visible.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 07:26 AM
link   
Natural Selection in the Post Industrial Era has weeded out all the potential Obama Voters in rural areas



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 07:26 AM
link   
Unless the road conditions and lighting are identical in all states and accident cases this statistic means nothing, surely?

Couldn't you also interpret this data to mean that blue states get more funding for road maintenance and lighting?

edit on 20-11-2012 by khimbar because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 07:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Those "blue" states are largely urban with high population densities. Any driving that's done there if at all is stop and go at 10mph.


woah woah woah im in california.... have you seen how people drive in california? almost everyone does and i can assure you people do not drive slow

you would think that with a lower population density there should be less accidents as a percentage
lack of lights isnt going to be a big factor with vehicle on vehicle accidents it would actually make it easier to see if there is another vehicle in the area but it could be a factor in hitting objects on the road so it would be interesting to see how many are caused by things like that
i would like to see further breakdowns of the cause of the accidents and whether or not alcohol was involved
i also would like to know what the chances are of seeing a police officer on the road in more rural areas because i would assume less and if thats the case people may feel they can get away with driving more recklessly

(and just an fyi 69% of accidents occur within 10 miles of the home so longer distances usually mean less accidents)
edit on 20-11-2012 by sirhumperdink because: (no reason given)


edit on 11/20/2012 by 12m8keall2c because: removed danging editby tag that was skewing font size



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 07:33 AM
link   
There are lies, damned lies, and statistics which may well be the case here, but nevertheless I find it interesting. California is royal blue, a huge state with a lot of cars and miles of open highway - even urban freeways travelling break-neck speeds with 5 travel lanes wide in each direction and cars travelling side-by-side in excess of 70 mph yet they are quite a way down the list. Most of the roads are fairly nice though.

It does make me wonder if there is some kind of political or societal factor at play in this finding.

edit on 20-11-2012 by Erongaricuaro because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 07:38 AM
link   
Because conservatives are only concerned about themselves and their cronies, while liberals are more concerned about others, and that translates to attitudes on the roads.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 07:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by nixie_nox
Because conservatives are only concerned about themselves and their cronies, while liberals are more concerned about others, and that translates to attitudes on the roads.


I may be inclined to give that some validity. Maybe it is the connection I was seeking. Red-staters do rather like their brewskis and one more for the road perhaps.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 07:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Erongaricuaro
 


Explanation: S&F!

I made a similar, but not politicized, thread quite a while ago ...

Average US drivers and Texans are worse drivers than local drivers, in 29 states of the US!!! (by OmegaLogos posted on 8-3-2011 @ 09:31 AM) [ATS]


Explanation: It has come to my attention that 1.4 deaths occur on average per single fatal motor vehical accident [mva] per 100,000 head of population per annum in the ENTIRE usa and that that is also the average for the state of Texas [TX].

It has also come to my attention that that average is WORSE than in 29 other states of the usa!

There are only 14 states with worse than the national or TX average [which is also shared by 5 other states]!

The safest state was MA with 7 deaths per 10 fatal mva's and the worst was MT with 21 deaths per 10 fatal mva's [TX and national average would be 14 deaths per 10 fatal mva's] and the difference between these two extremes is the TX and nation average in lives lost per 10 fatal mva's i.e 14 EXTRA fatalities.


So Texans may be your average driver in the usa BUT then those Texans and other average national drivers are WORSE drivers than local drivers in over 29 states of the usa!


I got my data from this 1pg only PDF. [NOTE: .pdf file]

Table 1102. Motor Vehical Accidents - Number and Deaths: 1980 to 2008 [census.gov]

And as OL is not an American I got my map data from... [NOTE: provided here for reference only]

Free US Map (including States and abreviations) [50states.com]


Personal Disclosure: I hope this info helps!



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 07:50 AM
link   


with 5 travel lanes wide in each direction


Versus a two lane highway with cars passing head on next to each other a high speed. A lot of accident out here in a rural area are crossing the center strip, turns on, off, narrow roads or running off the road on a tight curve..



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 07:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by nixie_nox
Because conservatives are only concerned about themselves and their cronies, while liberals are more concerned about others, and that translates to attitudes on the roads.


If conservatives were 'only concerned about themselves', they'd have lower death tolls as they'd be driving more carefully so as not to put themselves at risk, surely?



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by roadgravel



with 5 travel lanes wide in each direction


Versus a two lane highway with cars passing head on next to each other a high speed. A lot of accident out here in a rural area are crossing the center strip, turns on, off, narrow roads or running off the road on a tight curve..


try moving from the left most lane going 70+ to an exit on a five lane on a busy day ....and bring a fresh set of drawers if you think a two lane can be bad



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 07:58 AM
link   
reply to post by khimbar
 


Except that they are not paying attention to what anyone else who is on the road.

Actually, I am just being ornery.


It may have to do with education, since red states have much lower education scores.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 08:00 AM
link   
reply to post by sirhumperdink
 


I have lived in rural, and I have lived in city. Most rural people know how to drive those roads, the problems you face in rural are deer and white outs and weather conditions.

highway, you have thousands of other drivers around you.

What I will say is that no rural road competes with the DC beltway. People around here will avoid it for years when they first their license until they are brave enough to take it on.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 08:02 AM
link   
reply to post by nixie_nox
 


I approve of the word ornery.

The data on it's own proves nothing. It can be interpreted to all sorts of conclusions!

(and I'm not saying I disagree with your premise or agree, but nothing is that simple)




posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 08:03 AM
link   
And so what? What does this prove?

Looking at the statistics ALL traffic deaths are down significantly in ALL states. I really don't see where the moral contraposition can be made here.

Now.. put the statistics up on the percentage of those on the government dole between the red states and blue states and I can see a moral disparity argument there.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 08:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by roadgravel



with 5 travel lanes wide in each direction


Versus a two lane highway with cars passing head on next to each other a high speed. A lot of accident out here in a rural area are crossing the center strip, turns on, off, narrow roads or running off the road on a tight curve..


It may need to be pointed out that California also has many miles of the two-lane highways as well, and a lot of rural and mountainous driving, all terrains there.

Now, living in Mexico where driving habits are very different one might expect a higher number of accidents but I don't see that to be the case, there seems to be a lot more cooperation among the drivers. AND, I have found I can actually devote my attention to the road ahead rather than constantly having to watch the rear-view mirror. A simple speed-bump in the highway at the edges of a town does more to slow the traffic to a safe rate than two police cruisers lying-in-wait for violators. Emphasis seems to be more on safety than revenue enhancement.

edit on 20-11-2012 by Erongaricuaro because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join