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

As a trucker having seen all the states, the answer is easy and others have hit on it as well. The Coasts are heavily prone to two things. Traffic jams and traffic enforcement. Both of which are distinctly lacking in the center of the nation. States like California have open stretches but they also have the CHP using aircraft for enforcement and a very aggressive ground enforcement even when the aircraft aren't used.. They aren't unique but it's unusual enough to be sure. (I've only personally seen and listened to that in Ohio before split speeds were removed outside of California).

If one thinks about it though.....From the Cajon pass just outside Los Angeles, all the way to St Louis, Missouri there are only 3 real cities. Just 3 and 2 of those are over 1000 miles into that stretch. Albuquerque, Oklahoma City and Tulsa. That's 1,700 miles at 70-75mph speed limits all the way for cars and once out of California, all the way for trucks too. That would account for the death differences, IMO. That stretch and countless more like it running east/west and around the red states that one doesn't find up and down the I-5 and I-95 (west and east) corridors. Just my perspective...

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
As a trucker having seen all the states, the answer is easy and others have hit on it as well. The Coasts are heavily prone to two things. Traffic jams and traffic enforcement. Both of which are distinctly lacking in the center of the nation. States like California have open stretches but they also have the CHP using aircraft for enforcement and a very aggressive ground enforcement even when the aircraft aren't used.. They aren't unique but it's unusual enough to be sure. (I've only personally seen and listened to that in Ohio before split speeds were removed outside of California).

If one thinks about it though.....From the Cajon pass just outside Los Angeles, all the way to St Louis, Missouri there are only 3 real cities. Just 3 and 2 of those are over 1000 miles into that stretch. Albuquerque, Oklahoma City and Tulsa. That's 1,700 miles at 70-75mph speed limits all the way for cars and once out of California, all the way for trucks too. That would account for the death differences, IMO. That stretch and countless more like it running east/west and around the red states that one doesn't find up and down the I-5 and I-95 (west and east) corridors. Just my perspective...

only 1% of all accidents occur more than 50 miles from the home
69% of accidents occur within 10 miles of the home

(although highway accidents have higher rates of fatality)

reply to post by Wertdagf


Huh?

What does this have to do with fatal accident statistics?

Do you people use every opportunity you can get to preach?

reply to post by Erongaricuaro


why are as so many people determined to ignore this key sentence :

there are some important things that explain why states are different, and they're not political explanations," said Anne McCartt,

????????????????

Beings that people in red states are more fiscally responsible we can afford to put more people (per capita) in cars.

There are less car buyers in the centers of population in the blue states because there is more poverty there and more accessible cheap public transportation. Either that or they just walk. How many people in Manhattan own a car? You get the picture.

How about you look up a statistic on fatalities from car vs pedestrian accidents in the blue states vs red? How immoral isn't that people in blue states drive around looking for people to hit with their car.. Tsk Tsk Tsk.

reply to post by 11235813213455


More fiscally responsible?

How about them tax dollars that are funneled into social programs in the red states? Where do you think that money comes from?

Why, it comes from the over-taxed blue states!

Fiscally responsible? Ha ha ha!

I think these is an interesting introduction to a study but only that. It seems as if they arent looking at the may factors that could be causing this. I havent seen alcohol related deaths mentioned. Im sure that would be a huge factor. It may be possible to connect more rural driving styles with alcohol deaths. Factors like, less inhibition to drive drunk down lightly patrolled backroads, poor road and lighting, lax laws or possibly since they have smaller communities, local law enforcement is less likely to arrest.

Although vague, hopefully it could lead to examining why these statistics are what they are.

to add: i did notice while in Mississippi on the gulf coast, lots of people had no problem driving after drinking a few (or more) beers and even to the point of having open containers in the car. It was definitely culture shock coming from up north.

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by 11235813213455

 

More fiscally responsible?

How about them tax dollars that are funneled into social programs in the red states? Where do you think that money comes from?

Why, it comes from the over-taxed blue states!

Fiscally responsible? Ha ha ha!

Then stop the handouts. Who's the bigger fool, the guy with the hand out or the guy giving the handout?

reply to post by 11235813213455


turns out red states take in far more than they pay out to the federal government articles.businessinsider.com...

though i dont agree with the tone of the article the numbers given are correct

edit: taxfoundation.org...

you can check taxes by state from there and google what each state receives in federal aid and services

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
As a trucker having seen all the states, the answer is easy and others have hit on it as well. The Coasts are heavily prone to two things. Traffic jams and traffic enforcement. Both of which are distinctly lacking in the center of the nation. States like California have open stretches but they also have the CHP using aircraft for enforcement and a very aggressive ground enforcement even when the aircraft aren't used.. They aren't unique but it's unusual enough to be sure. (I've only personally seen and listened to that in Ohio before split speeds were removed outside of California).

If one thinks about it though.....From the Cajon pass just outside Los Angeles, all the way to St Louis, Missouri there are only 3 real cities. Just 3 and 2 of those are over 1000 miles into that stretch. Albuquerque, Oklahoma City and Tulsa. That's 1,700 miles at 70-75mph speed limits all the way for cars and once out of California, all the way for trucks too. That would account for the death differences, IMO. That stretch and countless more like it running east/west and around the red states that one doesn't find up and down the I-5 and I-95 (west and east) corridors. Just my perspective...

I think you bring up a very valid point. How many of these deaths are residents of these respective red states and how many of them are just passing through and aren't familiar with the road/area/weather for time of year/weather for time of day/wildlife(deer rutting season?)

I think some here arent really understanding that many blue states have hugely rural areas as well. Look at New York for example. I'm sure most people are only considering NYC but upstate is very rural too. Or a states like Maine, Pennsylvania or Oregon.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


That's not the point here.

It's people in the red states thinking they're all high and mighty and fiscally responsible and all that when they're nothing more than a bunch of moochers that want their cake and to eat it too.

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by Erongaricuaro

 

why are as so many people determined to ignore this key sentence :

there are some important things that explain why states are different, and they're not political explanations," said Anne McCartt,

????????????????

Good point. Perhaps there is a reverse consideration to examine, what elements promote a given area to become predominately red or blue? If blue politics is buying better access to "top-level trauma centers" as one of the factors given in the article, and if that has a great deal of bearing over the outcome of these accidents, or income and education as also is mentioned, then perhaps those safety factors are worth re-examining our priorities. Or not -

Traffic safety experts generally suggest that a mix of factors accounts for the varying rates. Possible variables include access to top-level trauma centers, weather conditions and how much of a state is rural, because rural residents may drive longer distances on narrow, winding roads. Lower income and education levels may also contribute to higher death rates.

"No matter how you look at fatal crash rates, there are some important things that explain why states are different, and they're not political explanations,"

reply to post by 11235813213455

I thought of something else as well.. How many are actually locals just using the 'big road' or interstate to jump a few exits and get clobbered by someone from out of the area, driving for hours and not even slowing down through the areas with people? I know out here on I-44 nearby, a couple of the worse ones that come to mind were high profile by having been State Troopers hit and/or killed while at other accident scenes. In the cases I do recall, they were out of state people that had been passing through.

..and of course trucks tend to make fatal accidents by sheer physics and I always found the slower companies to be on the East and populated areas as a general rule. The faster running trucks tended to be Midwest/South and running West Coast and back across the open states. I can't say how many times *I*...already driving an 18 wheeler at the time, have almost been blown off the road by OTHER trucks going 20-30 mph over what I was. That was running the 70 mph speed limit in my case. A car wouldn't even stand a theoretical chance in an accident with one of those morons.

Not something one commonly sees or at least, sees anyone get away with as one moves East of the Mississippi line or so. Just another factor that might explain fatals vs. injuries on the accidents.

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by thisguyrighthere

 

That's not the point here.

It's people in the red states thinking they're all high and mighty and fiscally responsible and all that when they're nothing more than a bunch of moochers that want their cake and to eat it too.

Isnt it though?

Stop giving the moochers cake.

Of course you wont. For the same reason all disseminators of welfare insist the welfare never stop. Control.

They like to claim high and mighty while being on the dole you like to claim high and mighty for handing it out.

It's a vicious and unnecessary cycle of stupidity all around.

The fed is like some sleazy date rapist. You owe them because they bought you dinner even if you werent hungry to begin with and the states in question lack the self-esteem to say no so they just lay there staring at the ceiling hoping it wont last long.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by thisguyrighthere

 

That's not the point here.

It's people in the red states thinking they're all high and mighty and fiscally responsible and all that when they're nothing more than a bunch of moochers that want their cake and to eat it too.

Isnt it though?

Stop giving the moochers cake.

Of course you wont. For the same reason all disseminators of welfare insist the welfare never stop. Control.

They like to claim high and mighty while being on the dole you like to claim high and mighty for handing it out.

It's a vicious and unnecessary cycle of stupidity all around.

i think its more along the lines of it would be catastrophic for the entire country to cut welfare to red states and let their infrastructure fall into irreparable decay and a lot less about being able to claim high and mighty status

reply to post by sirhumperdink


Then why did the morons vote for Romney/Ryan then?

They would have worked against their best interests.

Originally posted by sirhumperdink
i think its more along the lines of it would be catastrophic for the entire country to cut welfare to red states and let their infrastructure fall into irreparable decay and a lot less about being able to claim high and mighty status

One and the same.

No guarantee the infrastructure would crumble. If it should then so what?

The highways belong to the fed. If the fed wants them shiny and clean the fed can pay for it.

Everything else is the states business.

The world is dynamic and people will adjust.

Haha.

I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that overwhelimgly blue states have the largest cities. Those large cities have tons of traffic. You guys ever try to go 6 blocks crosstown in Manhattan?
-Cars in those areas, on average, are probably traveling 20-30 mph slower & thus do not have as many fatalities.
That has to figure in somehow I would think.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by sirhumperdink
i think its more along the lines of it would be catastrophic for the entire country to cut welfare to red states and let their infrastructure fall into irreparable decay and a lot less about being able to claim high and mighty status

One and the same.

No guarantee the infrastructure would crumble. If it should then so what?

The highways belong to the fed. If the fed wants them shiny and clean the fed can pay for it.

Everything else is the states business.

The world is dynamic and people will adjust.

except that most states offer something even if its only voters its important that their economies and infrastructure be well taken care of so they can produce people capable of making informed decisions

why is it so hard to accept that the world has changed... everything has become much more integrated what effects one area effects other areas

its not like every state has the same resources as every other state coal here iron there some oil down that way seafood from here corn from there
ore mined here then refined over there then taken to a factory way over thata way to make a product sold primarily in this place

understand?
so if someone makes a bad decision in texas it can effect life in new york... or vice versa and its a lot harder to adjust when things change if the entire model thats slowly been developed over hundreds of years suddenly shifts its not like flipping a switch