U.S. Traffic Fatalities Continued to Surge in First Half of 2016

The Wall Street Journal ^ | August 23, 2016 | Beckie Strum

[KeyLargo]

U.S. Traffic Fatalities Continued to Surge in First Half of 2016

Deaths rose 9%, extending a trend that began two years ago as the economy improved and travel increased Traffic fatalities were up 9% in the first six months of this year compared with the same period last year.

By Beckie Strum

Traffic fatalities rose 9% in the first six months of 2016, compared with a year earlier, as a stronger economy and falling gas prices encouraged Americans to spend more time behind the wheel, the National Safety Council said on Tuesday.

Traffic fatalities have been trending upward since 2014, when the price of gasoline plummeted and a strengthening economy spurred more travel. The average price at the pump has dropped more than a $1.30 per gallon, or 35%, since this time two years ago, according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

States including Vermont, Oregon and New Hampshire have been particularly deadly since the upward trend started in 2014, according to preliminary estimates compiled by the NSC, an Illinois-based nonprofit that collects data from state authorities.

Deaths on the road nearly doubled in tiny Vermont, population 620,000. The state recorded an 82% increase this year compared with the first six months of 2014.

Vermont is so small that even one bad crash can send its year-over-year change skyrocketing, said Scott Davidson, chief of the Governor’s Highway Safety Program. It had 57 fatal accidents in 2015, he said. “If I have a bus crash, my numbers go through the roof,” said Mr. Davidson.

In most states, Vermont included, people are simply driving more, leading to more crashes, Mr. Davidson said. “Nationally, there’s just more miles being traveled,” he said.

[KeyLargo]

"It will be almost impossible to determine that a driver is distracted by texting, reading emails, streaming a sporting event live, watching a Netflix video, etc."

Prosecutors have been subpoenaing cell phone records for years now during investigations of vehicle fatalities.

Bail revoked for woman charged in Brimfield crash that killed young brothers

In May, defense lawyer Joan Williams asked to move the trial to October, citing the more than 5,000 pages of cellphone records provided by prosecutors, who allege Hardy was texting at the time of the crash. http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2016/07/bail_revoked_for_holland_woman.html

Woman Sentenced to Prison in Fatal Distracted Driving Crash http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Woman-Sentenced-to-Prison-in-Fatal-Distracted-Driving-Crash--324442181.html

Driver Using Cellphone Convicted of Vehicular Manslaughter By Mike Doyle Aug. 13, 2015

http://www.kdrv.com/news/Driver_Using_Cellphone_Convicted_of_Vehicular_Manslaughter.html

Massachusetts teen convicted of homicide in texting-while-driving case

By the CNN Wire Staff

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/06/justice/massachusetts-texting-trial/

[Don W]

The safer and more automatic we make cars, the more careless and inept drivers become.

I’m not saying we should kill the stupid, I think we should just remove the warning labels and extreme safety devices and let nature take its course...

[Roman_War_Criminal]

That’s funny!
For some reason every time I am minding my own business in the slow lane and going the speed limit, some angry white hillbilly with tats in a truck is always riding my bumper and giving me the bird to get over. I assume they mean - get off the road.

Fords worse than Chevy’s for whatever reason.

White Rednecks in Trucks = Road Rage

[SamAdams76]

Yes, but what about watching a movie or reading email that has already been downloaded? I believe the scofflaws will always be one step ahead of the law as technology changes so fast.

[pluvmantelo]

Caliber of drivers markedly diminished over last several years. I concluded it was 1) foreigners (not just illegals) 2)Aging boomers 3) people, mostly younger folks, using cell phones. It’s gotten scary out there.

[T-Bone Texan]

Agreed, but I live in the big city.

I pine for road rage in the country.

[AngelesCrestHighway]

as the economy improved and travel increased...? How about as more illegals got driver’s licenses?

[IYAS9YAS]

2. Vehicles have far more safety features today, but I suspect they are increasingly unsafe in many high-impact collisions as fuel efficiency standards have pushed manufacturers to build lighter cars.

I'm going to say that is not a factor. Cars are actually not lighter today than they were 50 years ago. There is video out there of a IIHS crash test of a 2009 Chevy and a 1959 Chevy in an off-set collision. The 2009 busted into a million pieces, but the driver would have lived. The 1959 busted up, too, and the driver would have died instantly.

I looked into it further. The 1959 looked bigger and heavier, but that was due to perception. It was slightly longer, but no higher, and no wider.

It was also within 200 lbs of the 2009 Chevy in weight.

The weight difference between the two cars was insignificant in the crash.

1959 Bel Air 4-door
Weight (varies) 3,615 to 3,660 lbs.
Length - 210.5 inches (17' 6.5").
Width 79.9" (6' 7.9").
Height 54'-56'.

2009 Malibu:
weight: 3,415 lbs (200-245 lbs lighter)
Length: 191.8" (15' 11.8") - 18.7" shorter.
Width 70.3" (5' 10.3") - 9.6" narrower
Height 57.1" - 1.1 to 3.1 inches taller.

Sources: Malibu http://www.edmunds.com/chevrolet/malibu/2009/sedan/features-specs/

Bel Air: http://www.oldride.com/library/1959_chevrolet_bel_air.html

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPF4fBGNK0U

[IYAS9YAS]

Sorry, my post meant to say the 1959 was longer, but no higher and only slightly wider than the 2009.

[KeyLargo]

“Yes, but what about watching a movie or reading email that has already been downloaded?”

Although that of course is possible, the overwhelming use is to actively text and phone when driving.

It is easy, if necessary for law enforcement to also seize the device initially, during a fatal vehicle crash investigation, with an emergency court order for a tech to examine the device for any recent viewing, activity etc.

[Alberta's Child]

The comparison you cited doesn’t give a full picture at all. Instead of comparing two specific car models, you’d need to compare the average 1959 car with the average 2009 car. The best-selling models for most auto manufacturers today are probably sedans that weigh a lot less than that Malibu.

[Alberta's Child]

P.S. — You might be correct about the safety of the vehicles, though.

[jjotto]

The differences in braking, traction, maneuverability and acceleration (not to mention safety features) would give the 2009 the edge in any real situation.

[jjotto]

Traffic deaths per million miles continues to decline.

http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx

[IYAS9YAS]

Instead of comparing two specific car models, you’d need to compare the average 1959 car with the average 2009 car.

Weight alone does not matter when comparing 1959 to 2009. I owned a 1951 Chevy 1/2-ton pickup. No seatbelts, no crumple zones, no safety glass, drum brakes, Armstrong steering, Legstrong brakes, and vacuum-activated wipers. Going uphill in a rainstorm was always fun. Wipers pretty much stopped.

6-volt electrics, crap headlights, one taillight, no turn signals. It weighed in at a whopping 3,375 lbs. I dare say a modern Silverado 1500 4x2 weighs considerably more.

I even owned a 1966 Nova and a 1967 Nova. They were identical in dimensions/weight, and the 1967 was safer than the 1966. 1967 added a padded dash, safety glass, collapsible steering wheel.

It was billed as a mid-sized economy car. The Nova weighed between 2,520 to 2,885 (station wagon) lbs. It would be comparable to the Toyota Corrolla, Hyundai Sonata, or Honda Accord (maybe Civic) of today. They all weigh in over 3,100 lbs.

2017 Toyota Camry - Length 190.9", height 57.9", width 71.7", weight 3,240 to 3,350 lbs.

2017 Honda Accord - length 192.5", height 57.7", width 72.8", weight 3,170 to 3,605 lbs.

Hyundai Sonata - length 191.1", height 58.1", width 73.4", weight 3,250 to 3,589 lbs.

[wbill]

Up until the past year or so, there was a real surge in buying smaller cars - Priuses and such.

Wonder what effect that had on these numbers? If there's an accident in a big car, the car takes the beating. In a small car, you take the beating.

[KeyLargo]

Now that the price of fuel is relatively low, SUVs and Pick-ups are big sellers.

Only one small car passes tough crash test

Chris Woodyard, USA TODAY 1:11 p.m. EST January 22, 2014
Chevrolet Spark is the only car receiving a passing grade, and Honda Fit is the worst.

The smallest cars fared poorest as a group of any class of vehicles

The smallest cars on the road carry the biggest injury risk in a common and deadly type of crash, a report released Wednesday reveals.

Only one of 11 small city and minicars passed the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety’s small front overlap crash test in which a car hits a barrier with the front driver’s side corner at 40 miles per hour. It simulates clipping another car head-on or hitting a tree or pole.

The worst performer was the Honda Fit, which earned a “poor” rating in the test along with five other models and all but one of the rest were “marginal.”

Just one car among the 2013 and 2014 models tested received an “acceptable” rating in the tough test — the Chevrolet Spark. Thus, Spark is the only one in the group to earn the IIHS Top Safety Pick designation.

“We’re geeked,” says Chevrolet spokeswoman Annalisa Bluhm about the passing grade. She says improvements were made when the car was introduced into the U.S.but no modifications were added to pass the specific test. The car is a global product that was developed by General Motors’ GM Korea unit.

The group performed worse than any other car category on the test, which was instituted in 2012. None received the highest rating of “good.”

“Small, lightweight vehicles have an inherent safety disadvantage,” Joe Nolan, a senior vice president for the institute, the safety arm of the insurance industry, says in a statement.

Read: http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2014/01/22/iihs-small-cars-crash-test/4721607/

http://time.com/1529/the-terrifying-video-that-will-convince-you-not-to-buy-a-small-car/

[editor-surveyor]

.
Your ‘51 Chev PU needed a new fuel pump for the wipers to work under a load.

The top portion of the pump was a vacuum booster that was capable of keeping the wipers operating, if its diaphragm was not ruptured.
.

[WayneS]

I blame it on Pokémon Go...

[IYAS9YAS]

The top portion of the pump was a vacuum booster that was capable of keeping the wipers operating, if its diaphragm was not ruptured.

Wipers ran off manifold vacuum pressure. When it dropped, on acceleration or under load, the wipers slowed or stopped. They didn't run from the fuel pump.