Hacker News Reader

It seems disingenuous to dismiss this offhand as a reasonable proxy for incidents. It would be strange for there to be no correlation between fatal risk of injury, and chance of any injury, or 'incidents'.

View on HN

It is not disingenuous - it is quite clear that the kind of driving that happens in rural settings (fast, two-lane roads, no lights) is different from the kind of driving that happens in cities (slower, larger roads, street lights, stop lights)

https://www.mvmlaw.com/blog/do-car-accidents-happen-more-in-... has multiple links supporting this

Absolutely not contesting that 'driving is different', but GP was suggesting that crash deaths doesn't correlate with crashes fatal or otherwise, or at least correlates differently enough between rural and urban. Nothing in that link supports that claim.

Intuitively one might say that high velocity crashes could involve more fatalities, but an easy counter to that is that pedestrian deaths would represent more in urban areas.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com