Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There were 35 traffic fatalities in 2022. Here's what happened per the DC government:

12 deaths -- pedestrian error
9 deaths -- speeding driver
4 deaths -- drunk/stoned driver
4 deaths -- driver error
2 deaths -- bicycle error
2 deaths -- medical emergency
1 death -- scooter/motorcycle/atv error
1 death -- hit and run/unknown

This is a crock of bullshit. The DC crash data doesn't provide attribution of fault. This person posting this is interpreting every crash involving a dead pedestrian or cyclist as them being at fault. They are wrong.

This is what's so $!@#*(& up about this "debate". The idiots protesting road diet changes don't understand a goddamn thing about data yet say stuff like this like its fact. Absolutely freaking ridiculous.

This is all nonsense.

The figures come from the police department. Each year they put out a report that includes data on the causes of traffic deaths in the city. You can look them yourself.

For 2022, see page 24 of this report: https://mpdc.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/mpdc/publication/attachments/AR_2022_lowres.pdf

Any source - from the MPD or otherwise - that attributes every single crash to a single cause is just not serious.

I’m happy for you that you found a single publication that you think gives you the prerogative to blame cyclists and pedestrians for their own deaths, but you should also be aware that it reveals to the rest of us a gross ignorance and lack of critical thinking.

I look forward to you presenting your revelations - courtesy of the 2022 MPD Annual Report - in a public meeting and outing yourself for the fool that you are.

The report lists the "predominant cause" of each fatality. Also, is there someone else, besides the police department, who investigated what happened in each of these accidents?

Ask yourself who at MPD prepares annual reports. Then ask yourself if the authors of annual reports are those who complete major crash investigations. Further ask yourself what the investigators of those major crashes likely think about their work being crudely summarized in an idiotic tabulation. And then go felch yourself.

Yes, it's just a big conspiracy.

You're the only person in Washington D.C. who is pissed off that so few people here are killed by speeding dirvers.

What was described is the opposite of a conspiracy.

You’re the only person - well, probably not the only person, but among a select few - who refuses to understand the simple reality that excessive speed is a necessary condition in fatal accidents in a city where speed limits are set low enough to preclude fatal accidents when drivers adhere to them.

As the data shows, the majority of traffic deaths in Washington DC have nothing to do with excessive speed.

You and your “data” are a sick joke.

It's the DC government's data.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There were 35 traffic fatalities in 2022. Here's what happened per the DC government:

12 deaths -- pedestrian error
9 deaths -- speeding driver
4 deaths -- drunk/stoned driver
4 deaths -- driver error
2 deaths -- bicycle error
2 deaths -- medical emergency
1 death -- scooter/motorcycle/atv error
1 death -- hit and run/unknown

This is a crock of bullshit. The DC crash data doesn't provide attribution of fault. This person posting this is interpreting every crash involving a dead pedestrian or cyclist as them being at fault. They are wrong.

This is what's so $!@#*(& up about this "debate". The idiots protesting road diet changes don't understand a goddamn thing about data yet say stuff like this like its fact. Absolutely freaking ridiculous.

This is all nonsense.

The figures come from the police department. Each year they put out a report that includes data on the causes of traffic deaths in the city. You can look them yourself.

For 2022, see page 24 of this report: https://mpdc.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/mpdc/publication/attachments/AR_2022_lowres.pdf

Any source - from the MPD or otherwise - that attributes every single crash to a single cause is just not serious.

I’m happy for you that you found a single publication that you think gives you the prerogative to blame cyclists and pedestrians for their own deaths, but you should also be aware that it reveals to the rest of us a gross ignorance and lack of critical thinking.

I look forward to you presenting your revelations - courtesy of the 2022 MPD Annual Report - in a public meeting and outing yourself for the fool that you are.

The report lists the "predominant cause" of each fatality. Also, is there someone else, besides the police department, who investigated what happened in each of these accidents?

Ask yourself who at MPD prepares annual reports. Then ask yourself if the authors of annual reports are those who complete major crash investigations. Further ask yourself what the investigators of those major crashes likely think about their work being crudely summarized in an idiotic tabulation. And then go felch yourself.

Yes, it's just a big conspiracy.

You're the only person in Washington D.C. who is pissed off that so few people here are killed by speeding dirvers.

What was described is the opposite of a conspiracy.

You’re the only person - well, probably not the only person, but among a select few - who refuses to understand the simple reality that excessive speed is a necessary condition in fatal accidents in a city where speed limits are set low enough to preclude fatal accidents when drivers adhere to them.

There is no will for traffic enforcement beyond the revenue cameras. Residents/voters have been very clear they do not want cops pulling drivers over.

Do you have any actual evidence to back up that bold claim? A poll, referendum result, or such?

Honestly I think it’s too hot and hilly here for people to bike. The e-bikes have changed things but if you’d still be a hot mess at your destination a lot of the time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There were 35 traffic fatalities in 2022. Here's what happened per the DC government:

12 deaths -- pedestrian error
9 deaths -- speeding driver
4 deaths -- drunk/stoned driver
4 deaths -- driver error
2 deaths -- bicycle error
2 deaths -- medical emergency
1 death -- scooter/motorcycle/atv error
1 death -- hit and run/unknown

This is a crock of bullshit. The DC crash data doesn't provide attribution of fault. This person posting this is interpreting every crash involving a dead pedestrian or cyclist as them being at fault. They are wrong.

This is what's so $!@#*(& up about this "debate". The idiots protesting road diet changes don't understand a goddamn thing about data yet say stuff like this like its fact. Absolutely freaking ridiculous.

This is all nonsense.

The figures come from the police department. Each year they put out a report that includes data on the causes of traffic deaths in the city. You can look them yourself.

For 2022, see page 24 of this report: https://mpdc.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/mpdc/publication/attachments/AR_2022_lowres.pdf

Any source - from the MPD or otherwise - that attributes every single crash to a single cause is just not serious.

I’m happy for you that you found a single publication that you think gives you the prerogative to blame cyclists and pedestrians for their own deaths, but you should also be aware that it reveals to the rest of us a gross ignorance and lack of critical thinking.

I look forward to you presenting your revelations - courtesy of the 2022 MPD Annual Report - in a public meeting and outing yourself for the fool that you are.

The report lists the "predominant cause" of each fatality. Also, is there someone else, besides the police department, who investigated what happened in each of these accidents?

Ask yourself who at MPD prepares annual reports. Then ask yourself if the authors of annual reports are those who complete major crash investigations. Further ask yourself what the investigators of those major crashes likely think about their work being crudely summarized in an idiotic tabulation. And then go felch yourself.

Yes, it's just a big conspiracy.

You're the only person in Washington D.C. who is pissed off that so few people here are killed by speeding dirvers.

What was described is the opposite of a conspiracy.

You’re the only person - well, probably not the only person, but among a select few - who refuses to understand the simple reality that excessive speed is a necessary condition in fatal accidents in a city where speed limits are set low enough to preclude fatal accidents when drivers adhere to them.

As the data shows, the majority of traffic deaths in Washington DC have nothing to do with excessive speed.

You and your “data” are a sick joke.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love the people on here who are pro driving but also hate traffic. Just move to LA already. Enjoy 18 lanes of jammed traffic in each direction.

Yes this makes me laugh too. What these people don't understand is that the more car-centric a city is the more people choose to drive and thus the more traffic. It's called "induced demand." It's why every time you widen a highway and add more lanes you wind up with more traffic not less.

People who think the key to making their commute easier is to eliminate bike lanes and bus lanes and other alternative forms of transportation are idiots because they don't understand every cyclist is a car not on the road. Every bus is 30-40 cars not on the road. Every metro line is thousands of cars not on the road.

If your goal is less traffic you should support every initiative to encourage people to walk or bike or take public transportation including stuff like Vision Zero that makes those alternatives safer.

If you're successful you might just wind up with a nice relaxing car commute with minimal traffic because everyone else decided to skip the car.

Though admittedly you will have to pay through the nose for parking and you may not be able to drive right up to your office due to closing certain streets to car traffic. But it would be worth it! Imagine Connecticut Avenue with virtually no traffic (except in the bike lanes) at 8am! This is actually what it's like in a lot of cities that have successful shifted most of the population to car-free travel. I was in Sweden over the summer and we rented a car and we were regularly the only car on any given street and could park basically anywhere we wanted (again parking was incredibly pricy in the cities). Probably the easiest and most pleasant driving experience I've ever had. You do have to be very alert to bikes and pedestrians but there are so many of them this isn't that hard -- they have their own wide lanes and traffic signals and as long as you follow the rules you won't have trouble.

"Induced demand" is a lie. It's a bullshit theory made up by car hating weirdos. The average new car now costs almost $50,000. You think if we make traffic run more smoothly, everybody is going to rush out to spend $50,000 on a new car? Give me a break.

The government has very little influence over people's transportation choices. I mean, we've built more than 150 miles of bike lanes and bicycling is becoming *less* popular.

Your fantasy world is a running joke to the rest of us.

It’s a drop in the bucket, but at least someone in MPD realizes that there is a problem:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/08/27/dc-police-traffic-safety-unit/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love the people on here who are pro driving but also hate traffic. Just move to LA already. Enjoy 18 lanes of jammed traffic in each direction.

Yes this makes me laugh too. What these people don't understand is that the more car-centric a city is the more people choose to drive and thus the more traffic. It's called "induced demand." It's why every time you widen a highway and add more lanes you wind up with more traffic not less.

People who think the key to making their commute easier is to eliminate bike lanes and bus lanes and other alternative forms of transportation are idiots because they don't understand every cyclist is a car not on the road. Every bus is 30-40 cars not on the road. Every metro line is thousands of cars not on the road.

If your goal is less traffic you should support every initiative to encourage people to walk or bike or take public transportation including stuff like Vision Zero that makes those alternatives safer.

If you're successful you might just wind up with a nice relaxing car commute with minimal traffic because everyone else decided to skip the car.

Though admittedly you will have to pay through the nose for parking and you may not be able to drive right up to your office due to closing certain streets to car traffic. But it would be worth it! Imagine Connecticut Avenue with virtually no traffic (except in the bike lanes) at 8am! This is actually what it's like in a lot of cities that have successful shifted most of the population to car-free travel. I was in Sweden over the summer and we rented a car and we were regularly the only car on any given street and could park basically anywhere we wanted (again parking was incredibly pricy in the cities). Probably the easiest and most pleasant driving experience I've ever had. You do have to be very alert to bikes and pedestrians but there are so many of them this isn't that hard -- they have their own wide lanes and traffic signals and as long as you follow the rules you won't have trouble.

"Induced demand" is a lie. It's a bullshit theory made up by car hating weirdos. The average new car now costs almost $50,000. You think if we make traffic run more smoothly, everybody is going to rush out to spend $50,000 on a new car? Give me a break.

The government has very little influence over people's transportation choices. I mean, we've built more than 150 miles of bike lanes and bicycling is becoming *less* popular.

That's because the availability of bike lanes does not actually overcome people's reluctance to bike which is actually due to discomfort with biking (including not knowing how) lack of access to bikes as well as safety concerns. The majority of bike lanes don't even address safety concerns because people who don't want to bike are not just worried about being hit by cars. Also many bike lanes don't actually protect bikes from cars (most are just painted lines and drivers disregard them) so they do not make someone who has never commuted by bike before to start doing so.

But induced demand is real -- bike share programs have been enormously successful because they actually do provide non-bikers with a way to overcome a major obstacle to biking.

And induced demand with regards to cars is definitely a real phenomenon. The easiest to measure is the impact on usage of turning a two-lane highway into a four-lane highway. Lots of studies on this. People see the four lane highway and think "I won't have to wait to pass people -- this will go much faster" and they make decisions on where to live and work and when to drive based on it. The effects are lesser with regards to widening existing multi-lane highways but are still there. There is also a science to this when it comes to toll lanes -- you need the toll to be high enough that few enough people will pay it so that it's actually faster to use the toll lanes. If you charge too little everyone will just pay it and then the toll lanes get backed up. This is just a different variation on the concept of induced demand.

I am not even someone who cares much about bike infrastructure (I think in the US if you want to reduce cars on the road you should focus about 95% of your efforts on developing clean affordable convenient public transportation and about 5% on bikes) but induced demand is a basic principle of infrastructure planning. Saying "it's not real" reveals you to be a dilettante. It's a demonstrated and accepted phenomenon.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love the people on here who are pro driving but also hate traffic. Just move to LA already. Enjoy 18 lanes of jammed traffic in each direction.

Yes this makes me laugh too. What these people don't understand is that the more car-centric a city is the more people choose to drive and thus the more traffic. It's called "induced demand." It's why every time you widen a highway and add more lanes you wind up with more traffic not less.

People who think the key to making their commute easier is to eliminate bike lanes and bus lanes and other alternative forms of transportation are idiots because they don't understand every cyclist is a car not on the road. Every bus is 30-40 cars not on the road. Every metro line is thousands of cars not on the road.

If your goal is less traffic you should support every initiative to encourage people to walk or bike or take public transportation including stuff like Vision Zero that makes those alternatives safer.

If you're successful you might just wind up with a nice relaxing car commute with minimal traffic because everyone else decided to skip the car.

Though admittedly you will have to pay through the nose for parking and you may not be able to drive right up to your office due to closing certain streets to car traffic. But it would be worth it! Imagine Connecticut Avenue with virtually no traffic (except in the bike lanes) at 8am! This is actually what it's like in a lot of cities that have successful shifted most of the population to car-free travel. I was in Sweden over the summer and we rented a car and we were regularly the only car on any given street and could park basically anywhere we wanted (again parking was incredibly pricy in the cities). Probably the easiest and most pleasant driving experience I've ever had. You do have to be very alert to bikes and pedestrians but there are so many of them this isn't that hard -- they have their own wide lanes and traffic signals and as long as you follow the rules you won't have trouble.

"Induced demand" is a lie. It's a bullshit theory made up by car hating weirdos. The average new car now costs almost $50,000. You think if we make traffic run more smoothly, everybody is going to rush out to spend $50,000 on a new car? Give me a break.

The government has very little influence over people's transportation choices. I mean, we've built more than 150 miles of bike lanes and bicycling is becoming *less* popular.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There were 35 traffic fatalities in 2022. Here's what happened per the DC government:

12 deaths -- pedestrian error
9 deaths -- speeding driver
4 deaths -- drunk/stoned driver
4 deaths -- driver error
2 deaths -- bicycle error
2 deaths -- medical emergency
1 death -- scooter/motorcycle/atv error
1 death -- hit and run/unknown

This is a crock of bullshit. The DC crash data doesn't provide attribution of fault. This person posting this is interpreting every crash involving a dead pedestrian or cyclist as them being at fault. They are wrong.

This is what's so $!@#*(& up about this "debate". The idiots protesting road diet changes don't understand a goddamn thing about data yet say stuff like this like its fact. Absolutely freaking ridiculous.

This is all nonsense.

The figures come from the police department. Each year they put out a report that includes data on the causes of traffic deaths in the city. You can look them yourself.

For 2022, see page 24 of this report: https://mpdc.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/mpdc/publication/attachments/AR_2022_lowres.pdf

Any source - from the MPD or otherwise - that attributes every single crash to a single cause is just not serious.

I’m happy for you that you found a single publication that you think gives you the prerogative to blame cyclists and pedestrians for their own deaths, but you should also be aware that it reveals to the rest of us a gross ignorance and lack of critical thinking.

I look forward to you presenting your revelations - courtesy of the 2022 MPD Annual Report - in a public meeting and outing yourself for the fool that you are.

The report lists the "predominant cause" of each fatality. Also, is there someone else, besides the police department, who investigated what happened in each of these accidents?

Ask yourself who at MPD prepares annual reports. Then ask yourself if the authors of annual reports are those who complete major crash investigations. Further ask yourself what the investigators of those major crashes likely think about their work being crudely summarized in an idiotic tabulation. And then go felch yourself.

Yes, it's just a big conspiracy.

You're the only person in Washington D.C. who is pissed off that so few people here are killed by speeding dirvers.

What was described is the opposite of a conspiracy.

You’re the only person - well, probably not the only person, but among a select few - who refuses to understand the simple reality that excessive speed is a necessary condition in fatal accidents in a city where speed limits are set low enough to preclude fatal accidents when drivers adhere to them.

As the data shows, the majority of traffic deaths in Washington DC have nothing to do with excessive speed.

but they ALL have to do with cars! shall I say it again? vision zero/traffic calming includes much more than speeding.

No, they don't. There's traffic deaths all the time that don't involve cars. Didn't some e-bicyclist just kill another e-bicyclist in a crash? Besides who cares if they involve cars? That's like saying, because all traffic deaths happened outdoors, no one should be allowed to go outdoors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There were 35 traffic fatalities in 2022. Here's what happened per the DC government:

12 deaths -- pedestrian error
9 deaths -- speeding driver
4 deaths -- drunk/stoned driver
4 deaths -- driver error
2 deaths -- bicycle error
2 deaths -- medical emergency
1 death -- scooter/motorcycle/atv error
1 death -- hit and run/unknown

This is a crock of bullshit. The DC crash data doesn't provide attribution of fault. This person posting this is interpreting every crash involving a dead pedestrian or cyclist as them being at fault. They are wrong.

This is what's so $!@#*(& up about this "debate". The idiots protesting road diet changes don't understand a goddamn thing about data yet say stuff like this like its fact. Absolutely freaking ridiculous.

This is all nonsense.

The figures come from the police department. Each year they put out a report that includes data on the causes of traffic deaths in the city. You can look them yourself.

For 2022, see page 24 of this report: https://mpdc.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/mpdc/publication/attachments/AR_2022_lowres.pdf

Any source - from the MPD or otherwise - that attributes every single crash to a single cause is just not serious.

I’m happy for you that you found a single publication that you think gives you the prerogative to blame cyclists and pedestrians for their own deaths, but you should also be aware that it reveals to the rest of us a gross ignorance and lack of critical thinking.

I look forward to you presenting your revelations - courtesy of the 2022 MPD Annual Report - in a public meeting and outing yourself for the fool that you are.

The report lists the "predominant cause" of each fatality. Also, is there someone else, besides the police department, who investigated what happened in each of these accidents?

Ask yourself who at MPD prepares annual reports. Then ask yourself if the authors of annual reports are those who complete major crash investigations. Further ask yourself what the investigators of those major crashes likely think about their work being crudely summarized in an idiotic tabulation. And then go felch yourself.

Yes, it's just a big conspiracy.

You're the only person in Washington D.C. who is pissed off that so few people here are killed by speeding dirvers.

What was described is the opposite of a conspiracy.

You’re the only person - well, probably not the only person, but among a select few - who refuses to understand the simple reality that excessive speed is a necessary condition in fatal accidents in a city where speed limits are set low enough to preclude fatal accidents when drivers adhere to them.

As the data shows, the majority of traffic deaths in Washington DC have nothing to do with excessive speed.

but they ALL have to do with cars! shall I say it again? vision zero/traffic calming includes much more than speeding.

One lesson we should all take from COVID is that some cures can be exponentially worse than the disease.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People are not being killed at an alarming rate. The numbers have been very steady over time. If anything most of the counter measures have made things worse by increasing congestion on high congestion roads. It's always been a stalking horse and I for one am glad to now have more names attached to these morons whose ideas are so bad.

If your goal is fewer pedestrian deaths that increasing congestion does not "make things worse" because congestion is not a cause of pedestrian deaths. Congestion slows down drivers and speed is the #1 cause of pedestrians being hit by cars (even a car going the speed limit can kill a pedestrian if they go through a traffic signal or stop sign or turn without signaling or yielding right of way).

Congesting may make other things worse but it does not lead to pedestrian deaths which is the subject of this thread.

Also I will probably regret this but what rate of pedestrian deaths would you consider "alarming." I am guessing you think there is a number of deaths that is okay which is interesting because what you are saying is that there is a human death toll that is "worth" having shorter commutes or being able to drive faster. That's interesting to me. What if every time we built a highway or highway bridge 30-40 people died during construction. Would that be alarming. Or would that just be the cost of making sure people can get from Point A to Point B -- some people are gonna have to die.

If dozens of people were being killed on WMATA trains and buses every year, the system would be shut down. But dozens of people die on DC streets and we are supposed to shrug and moving along while changing absolutely nothing. I fundamentally do not understand this attitude. It’s as if those who are killed in vehicular crashes are some kind of less worthy species whose demise we shouldn’t be much concerned about.

Get a grip. Are you worried about being murdered? Because you're far, far more likely to be murdered.

Actually the fact that society seems to collectively shrug at the traffic deaths and freak out loudly about murders is pretty weird. FWIW they seem to be related since the historical low in traffic deaths was the same year as historical low in murders. Plenty of ppl concerned with both.

There were 202 murders in DC 2022 and only 35 traffic deaths. People were 7.8x more likely to get murdered than die in traffic in DC, so it makes sense that murders get more attention.

2022 was lower - the concern is the sharp increase to 50+ in 2023.

Which ironically is the before and after for a lot of the changes.

what changes?

"Traffic calming"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There were 35 traffic fatalities in 2022. Here's what happened per the DC government:

12 deaths -- pedestrian error
9 deaths -- speeding driver
4 deaths -- drunk/stoned driver
4 deaths -- driver error
2 deaths -- bicycle error
2 deaths -- medical emergency
1 death -- scooter/motorcycle/atv error
1 death -- hit and run/unknown

This is a crock of bullshit. The DC crash data doesn't provide attribution of fault. This person posting this is interpreting every crash involving a dead pedestrian or cyclist as them being at fault. They are wrong.

This is what's so $!@#*(& up about this "debate". The idiots protesting road diet changes don't understand a goddamn thing about data yet say stuff like this like its fact. Absolutely freaking ridiculous.

This is all nonsense.

The figures come from the police department. Each year they put out a report that includes data on the causes of traffic deaths in the city. You can look them yourself.

For 2022, see page 24 of this report: https://mpdc.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/mpdc/publication/attachments/AR_2022_lowres.pdf

Any source - from the MPD or otherwise - that attributes every single crash to a single cause is just not serious.

I’m happy for you that you found a single publication that you think gives you the prerogative to blame cyclists and pedestrians for their own deaths, but you should also be aware that it reveals to the rest of us a gross ignorance and lack of critical thinking.

I look forward to you presenting your revelations - courtesy of the 2022 MPD Annual Report - in a public meeting and outing yourself for the fool that you are.

The report lists the "predominant cause" of each fatality. Also, is there someone else, besides the police department, who investigated what happened in each of these accidents?

Ask yourself who at MPD prepares annual reports. Then ask yourself if the authors of annual reports are those who complete major crash investigations. Further ask yourself what the investigators of those major crashes likely think about their work being crudely summarized in an idiotic tabulation. And then go felch yourself.

Yes, it's just a big conspiracy.

You're the only person in Washington D.C. who is pissed off that so few people here are killed by speeding dirvers.

What was described is the opposite of a conspiracy.

You’re the only person - well, probably not the only person, but among a select few - who refuses to understand the simple reality that excessive speed is a necessary condition in fatal accidents in a city where speed limits are set low enough to preclude fatal accidents when drivers adhere to them.

As the data shows, the majority of traffic deaths in Washington DC have nothing to do with excessive speed.

but they ALL have to do with cars! shall I say it again? vision zero/traffic calming includes much more than speeding.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There were 35 traffic fatalities in 2022. Here's what happened per the DC government:

12 deaths -- pedestrian error
9 deaths -- speeding driver
4 deaths -- drunk/stoned driver
4 deaths -- driver error
2 deaths -- bicycle error
2 deaths -- medical emergency
1 death -- scooter/motorcycle/atv error
1 death -- hit and run/unknown

This is a crock of bullshit. The DC crash data doesn't provide attribution of fault. This person posting this is interpreting every crash involving a dead pedestrian or cyclist as them being at fault. They are wrong.

This is what's so $!@#*(& up about this "debate". The idiots protesting road diet changes don't understand a goddamn thing about data yet say stuff like this like its fact. Absolutely freaking ridiculous.

This is all nonsense.

The figures come from the police department. Each year they put out a report that includes data on the causes of traffic deaths in the city. You can look them yourself.

For 2022, see page 24 of this report: https://mpdc.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/mpdc/publication/attachments/AR_2022_lowres.pdf

Any source - from the MPD or otherwise - that attributes every single crash to a single cause is just not serious.

I’m happy for you that you found a single publication that you think gives you the prerogative to blame cyclists and pedestrians for their own deaths, but you should also be aware that it reveals to the rest of us a gross ignorance and lack of critical thinking.

I look forward to you presenting your revelations - courtesy of the 2022 MPD Annual Report - in a public meeting and outing yourself for the fool that you are.

The report lists the "predominant cause" of each fatality. Also, is there someone else, besides the police department, who investigated what happened in each of these accidents?

Ask yourself who at MPD prepares annual reports. Then ask yourself if the authors of annual reports are those who complete major crash investigations. Further ask yourself what the investigators of those major crashes likely think about their work being crudely summarized in an idiotic tabulation. And then go felch yourself.

Yes, it's just a big conspiracy.

You're the only person in Washington D.C. who is pissed off that so few people here are killed by speeding dirvers.

What was described is the opposite of a conspiracy.

You’re the only person - well, probably not the only person, but among a select few - who refuses to understand the simple reality that excessive speed is a necessary condition in fatal accidents in a city where speed limits are set low enough to preclude fatal accidents when drivers adhere to them.

As the data shows, the majority of traffic deaths in Washington DC have nothing to do with excessive speed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love the people on here who are pro driving but also hate traffic. Just move to LA already. Enjoy 18 lanes of jammed traffic in each direction.

Yes this makes me laugh too. What these people don't understand is that the more car-centric a city is the more people choose to drive and thus the more traffic. It's called "induced demand." It's why every time you widen a highway and add more lanes you wind up with more traffic not less.

People who think the key to making their commute easier is to eliminate bike lanes and bus lanes and other alternative forms of transportation are idiots because they don't understand every cyclist is a car not on the road. Every bus is 30-40 cars not on the road. Every metro line is thousands of cars not on the road.

If your goal is less traffic you should support every initiative to encourage people to walk or bike or take public transportation including stuff like Vision Zero that makes those alternatives safer.

If you're successful you might just wind up with a nice relaxing car commute with minimal traffic because everyone else decided to skip the car.

Though admittedly you will have to pay through the nose for parking and you may not be able to drive right up to your office due to closing certain streets to car traffic. But it would be worth it! Imagine Connecticut Avenue with virtually no traffic (except in the bike lanes) at 8am! This is actually what it's like in a lot of cities that have successful shifted most of the population to car-free travel. I was in Sweden over the summer and we rented a car and we were regularly the only car on any given street and could park basically anywhere we wanted (again parking was incredibly pricy in the cities). Probably the easiest and most pleasant driving experience I've ever had. You do have to be very alert to bikes and pedestrians but there are so many of them this isn't that hard -- they have their own wide lanes and traffic signals and as long as you follow the rules you won't have trouble.

"Induced demand" is a lie. It's a bullshit theory made up by car hating weirdos. The average new car now costs almost $50,000. You think if we make traffic run more smoothly, everybody is going to rush out to spend $50,000 on a new car? Give me a break.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love the people on here who are pro driving but also hate traffic. Just move to LA already. Enjoy 18 lanes of jammed traffic in each direction.

Yes this makes me laugh too. What these people don't understand is that the more car-centric a city is the more people choose to drive and thus the more traffic. It's called "induced demand." It's why every time you widen a highway and add more lanes you wind up with more traffic not less.

People who think the key to making their commute easier is to eliminate bike lanes and bus lanes and other alternative forms of transportation are idiots because they don't understand every cyclist is a car not on the road. Every bus is 30-40 cars not on the road. Every metro line is thousands of cars not on the road.

If your goal is less traffic you should support every initiative to encourage people to walk or bike or take public transportation including stuff like Vision Zero that makes those alternatives safer.

If you're successful you might just wind up with a nice relaxing car commute with minimal traffic because everyone else decided to skip the car.

Though admittedly you will have to pay through the nose for parking and you may not be able to drive right up to your office due to closing certain streets to car traffic. But it would be worth it! Imagine Connecticut Avenue with virtually no traffic (except in the bike lanes) at 8am! This is actually what it's like in a lot of cities that have successful shifted most of the population to car-free travel. I was in Sweden over the summer and we rented a car and we were regularly the only car on any given street and could park basically anywhere we wanted (again parking was incredibly pricy in the cities). Probably the easiest and most pleasant driving experience I've ever had. You do have to be very alert to bikes and pedestrians but there are so many of them this isn't that hard -- they have their own wide lanes and traffic signals and as long as you follow the rules you won't have trouble.

You act like suburban commuters care. The more car unfriendly DC becomes, the more pressure there will be on DC employers to move to Virginia or Maryland