Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by dhbradshaw | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

dhbradshaw

Here's kind of a weird hypothesis worth at least considering:

Record pricing for used cars suggests that there's a car shortage.

Ironically, less cars and less driving could lead to

1. Faster driving because of clearer roads, and

2. More walking.

Combine those and it wouldn't be surprising to get more auto-pedestrian accidents.

One test would be to compare changes to car accidents with changes to pedestrian accidents. Reckless driving should bring both up. More pedestrians should only bring the latter up.

View on HN

It's a known hypothesis. Additionally when there is less traffic, drivers feel safer and are more likely to tune out by checking their phones, etc.

The book,Confessions of a Recovering Engineer(1), talks about this.

(1) https://www.confessions.engineer

The Not Just Bikes Youtube channel consistently points out how Dutch street design focuses on making driving seem "scarier" to lower driving speeds as a safety measure. These aren't ridiculous measures. These are sensible measures such as eliminating one way lanes where possible (people tend to drive much faster in one way lanes), not having car lanes that are excessively wide, having level crossings for pedestrians, which means it's the cars that see a bump in the road, etc.

I don't know. Anecdotally traffic around where I am seemed to be pretty much back to normal surprisingly early on. I decided I really lived in a bubble because most people I knew were definitely staying home a lot more.

Rush hour traffic is always going to be a bell curve. Fewer total people driving just makes the bell more narrow. 8:30 - 9 will always suck but 10 might be okay now.

I have not been in stop-n-go for two years on major highways. Before that would happen on a monthly or maybe even weekly basis. Seattle area.

2. More people walking who rarely walked before.

The point being, when possible, you should walk facing into traffic. I see people, often enough, walking in the road with traffic. Experienced walkers tend to know this.

Realistically, this should never happen on a halfway busy city road - and by the time you get to neighborhoods, it shouldn't be an issue because of (hopefully) low speeds. We should have sidewalks and other barriers to keep pedestrians safe: Making sure they have the right of way only increases this. The only time someone really would need to walk on the other side is on country roads, and honestly, there is only so much walking on the other side will do.

Just to point out, a sidewalk is not really a barrier. It's easy for a car to hop the curb and kill someone. It can still be a good idea to face traffic so at least you have a chance at dodging (if they're coming from behind you could be able to hear them getting too close to your side; also somewhat less likely that they would drift that far).

I thought this was something everyone learned when they were quite young.

In many places walking on the right side of the road is illegal (if on the actual road and not a sidewalk). But you'll almost never see it enforced.

> The point being, when possible, you should walk facing into traffic.

Please do not recommend this reckless and often illegal behavior.

If walking in the street, one should walk with traffic when possible.

Drivers and other forms of traffic merging into traffic do not expect pedestrian traffic coming from the wrong direction.

Salmoning causes other dangers, too, for example, by making it difficult to impossible for traffic to avoid collisions by stopping.

Governments disagree. e.g. https://trafficsafety.ny.gov/tips-pedestrian-safety

Thank you for the link.

Either guidance and some laws have changed since I last was educated on this topic or my memory is faulty.

Given the number off people who text while driving, I'd say you're far more likely to get hit from behind than you woukd while walking into traffic.

This seems odd to me because a pedestrian is almost never going to be able to dodge oncoming even slow-moving traffic.

Perhaps it’s about observing inattentive drivers before they present immediate danger or establishing eye contact?

In any case, I stand corrected on the legality of pedestrian salmoning, though I’m not convinced of its advisability.

"This seems odd to me because a pedestrian is almost never going to be able to dodge oncoming even slow-moving traffic."

If you work the field at an AutoX course, you'll know that it is quite possible to dodge them. The chances of dodging a car when paying attention are substantially higher than if one is not.

The car shortage is relative to demand. Demand isn’t just from new drivers, it’s from people using the extremely low-interest loans available combined with an influx of stimulus money across the economy (filtered down to some consumers) to upgrade to new cars. The chip shortage, among other shortages, is also constraining supply of new cars.

It wouldn’t necessarily increase the number of people walking or fewer cars on the road. The net effect is a shift to newer and more expensive cars among drivers.

The article mentions your first point, and also gives some statistics that deaths to drivers are also up.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com