Comments on: The Weekly Carnage http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/12/15/the-weekly-carnage-19/ Covering the New York City Streets Renaissance Fri, 10 Feb 2012 16:07:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: ddartley http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/12/15/the-weekly-carnage-19/comment-page-1/#comment-18924 ddartley Mon, 18 Dec 2006 04:40:12 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/12/15/the-weekly-carnage-19/#comment-18924 I just noticed this paragraph in one of the articles about the mother and unborn child, and senior who died on Rt. 100: "In the rural communities of northern Westchester, Putnam and Rockland counties, an aging senior's isolation can lead to a Hobson's Choice: Take a risk and drive, or stay home alone, again. It doesn't have to be that way. Now, while active senior developments are still on the drawing boards, town leaders in the Lower Hudson Valley must get concessions from developers and start planning for better public transportation. Today's active seniors will be tomorrow's old and frail. And then how are they going to get to the store, the movies, the doctor?" I just noticed this paragraph in one of the articles about the mother and unborn child, and senior who died on Rt. 100:

“In the rural communities of northern Westchester, Putnam and Rockland counties, an aging senior’s isolation can lead to a Hobson’s Choice: Take a risk and drive, or stay home alone, again. It doesn’t have to be that way. Now, while active senior developments are still on the drawing boards, town leaders in the Lower Hudson Valley must get concessions from developers and start planning for better public transportation. Today’s active seniors will be tomorrow’s old and frail. And then how are they going to get to the store, the movies, the doctor?”

]]> By: Justin http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/12/15/the-weekly-carnage-19/comment-page-1/#comment-18532 Justin Sat, 16 Dec 2006 00:39:27 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/12/15/the-weekly-carnage-19/#comment-18532 Hey, I caught this story on the evening news. I thought it might interest you as well. http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=local&id=4855638 Hey, I caught this story on the evening news. I thought it might interest you as well.

http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=local&id=4855638

]]> By: Rob http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/12/15/the-weekly-carnage-19/comment-page-1/#comment-18422 Rob Fri, 15 Dec 2006 20:16:22 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/12/15/the-weekly-carnage-19/#comment-18422 I'm guessing those statistics are from the CSPC (Consumer Products Safety Council) while the DOT keeps track of automobile sats. I’m guessing those statistics are from the CSPC (Consumer Products Safety Council) while the DOT keeps track of automobile sats.

]]> By: Steve http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/12/15/the-weekly-carnage-19/comment-page-1/#comment-18421 Steve Fri, 15 Dec 2006 20:15:15 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/12/15/the-weekly-carnage-19/#comment-18421 It's probably #1. In past analyses, Census Bureau has excluded automobiles from "consumer products." See http://www.census.gov/prod/3/97pubs/97statab/health.pdf . They do have some interesting data on motor vehicle collisions. I interpret the chart linked below to indicate that nationally, there were approximately 700 bicyclists killed in motor vehicle crashes annually, with the annual death rate remaining relatively essentially flat over the decade ending in 2004; while the annual number of pedestrians killed in motor vehicle crashes decreased significantly over the same period of time (from 5,600 to 4,600). Someone who knows something about statistics might be able to correlate data on changes in bicycling vs. walking by region and test whether the inconsistency in trend is due to a relative increase in walking. http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/tables/07s1082.xls It’s probably #1. In past analyses, Census Bureau has excluded automobiles from “consumer products.” See http://www.census.gov/prod/3/97pubs/97statab/health.pdf .

They do have some interesting data on motor vehicle collisions. I interpret the chart linked below to indicate that nationally, there were approximately 700 bicyclists killed in motor vehicle crashes annually, with the annual death rate remaining relatively essentially flat over the decade ending in 2004; while the annual number of pedestrians killed in motor vehicle crashes decreased significantly over the same period of time (from 5,600 to 4,600). Someone who knows something about statistics might be able to correlate data on changes in bicycling vs. walking by region and test whether the inconsistency in trend is due to a relative increase in walking.

http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/tables/07s1082.xls

]]> By: AD http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/12/15/the-weekly-carnage-19/comment-page-1/#comment-18374 AD Fri, 15 Dec 2006 18:27:36 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/12/15/the-weekly-carnage-19/#comment-18374 I'm going to go with (1) for now, but keep us posted. I’m going to go with (1) for now, but keep us posted.

]]> By: Steve http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/12/15/the-weekly-carnage-19/comment-page-1/#comment-18365 Steve Fri, 15 Dec 2006 18:07:33 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/12/15/the-weekly-carnage-19/#comment-18365 The NYT reports today on the soon-to-be released 2007 report of the U.S. Census Bureau. According to the Times: "Bicycles are involved in more accidents than any other consumer product, but beds rank a close second. . . . The table of consumer products involved in injuries does not explain . . . for example, that one reason nearly as many injuries involve beds as bicycles is that more people use beds." I have not been able to find the report or the table that the Times discusses, but can it possibly that be that either (1) automobiles are not listed as a consumer product in the table or (2) if they are, they are associated with fewer accidents than bicycles? It seems that one or the other of these things must be true. Or maybe in the doublespeak of the U.S. Census Bureau, automobiles do not cause "injuries," but only "accidents"? The NYT reports today on the soon-to-be released 2007 report of the U.S. Census Bureau. According to the Times:

“Bicycles are involved in more accidents than any other consumer product, but beds rank a close second. . . . The table of consumer products involved in injuries does not explain . . . for example, that one reason nearly as many injuries involve beds as bicycles is that more people use beds.”

I have not been able to find the report or the table that the Times discusses, but can it possibly that be that either (1) automobiles are not listed as a consumer product in the table or (2) if they are, they are associated with fewer accidents than bicycles? It seems that one or the other of these things must be true. Or maybe in the doublespeak of the U.S. Census Bureau, automobiles do not cause “injuries,” but only “accidents”?

]]> By: AD http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/12/15/the-weekly-carnage-19/comment-page-1/#comment-18320 AD Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:35:06 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/12/15/the-weekly-carnage-19/#comment-18320 Thanks Steve. I added it. Thanks Steve. I added it.

]]> By: Steve http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/12/15/the-weekly-carnage-19/comment-page-1/#comment-18318 Steve Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:32:48 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/12/15/the-weekly-carnage-19/#comment-18318 I suppose the collision described in this post ( http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/12/14/central-park-cyclist-in-serious-condition/#comments )involving a female bicyclist hit by a motor vehicle belongs in here. There is a complete lack of news/details on this incident. I suppose the collision described in this post ( http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/12/14/central-park-cyclist-in-serious-condition/#comments )involving a female bicyclist hit by a motor vehicle belongs in here. There is a complete lack of news/details on this incident.

]]>