IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 20th November 2012, 11:35 AM   #1
Spindrift
Time Person of the Year, 2006
 
Spindrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Right here!
Posts: 19,246
Living in a red state is dangerous

No this isn't about guns.

Apparently if you live in a red state there's a better chance that you will be killed in car accident.

Check out the chart in this link:
http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news...accidents?lite

Quote:
Massachusetts was lowest among the states, with 4.79 road deaths per 100,000 people. By contrast, red Wyoming had a fatality rate of 27.46 per 100,000.
The average for the USA is 10.63. Of the 24 states below that number only 3 voted red in the presidential election.
__________________
I've always believed that cluelessness evolved as an adaptation to allow the truly appalling to live with themselves. - G. B. Trudeau
A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. - Kay, Men in Black.
Enjoy every sandwich. - Warren Zevon
Spindrift is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 11:41 AM   #2
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Originally Posted by Spindrift View Post
No this isn't about guns.

Apparently if you live in a red state there's a better chance that you will be killed in car accident.

Check out the chart in this link:
http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news...accidents?lite



The average for the USA is 10.63. Of the 24 states below that number only 3 voted red in the presidential election.
I wonder if that's a function of traffic? Heavy traffic = slower driving speeds, while open roads = speeders?
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 11:43 AM   #3
LibraryLady
Emeritus
 
LibraryLady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 14,265
Could a contributing factor be willingness to follow rules? There's most likely no one factor, but a bunch of them. However, cooperation and willingness to follow rules might be at play here.

I've never really followed this up, and it might be confirmation bias, but it seems to me that the cars with the most bumper stickers that make libertarian or right wing statements are usually the ones driving most aggressively.

Please don't kill the messenger.

ETA:
Bumper stickers may lead to bumper cars

McCabe, Francis. Las Vegas Review - Journal [Las Vegas, Nev] 29 June 2008: B.2.

There have been studies backing this up, but it turns out what the stickers say doesn't make a difference.
__________________
What I tell you three times is true.

Last edited by LibraryLady; 20th November 2012 at 11:51 AM.
LibraryLady is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 12:52 PM   #4
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 20,570
The proper metric is not deaths per 100,000 people, but deaths per 100,000 miles driven. Red states tend to be rural and thus I suspect that the average person drives a lot more miles than in urban, blue-states, where many take mass transit.

ETA: And even adjusted for that, it appears that rural driving in general is more dangerous. Look at New York's driving fatality rate, for example. Driving in rural areas is about 2-1/2 to 3 times more likely to result in a death per mile driven than in urban areas. I suspect that Unabogie is right; the main difference between rural and urban areas is probably the average speed.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

Last edited by Brainster; 20th November 2012 at 01:04 PM.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 12:57 PM   #5
bonzombiekitty
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,848
I would think it's several fold-

1. Traffic is less dense in "red" states. More long stretches of open road with few people on it means that people will drive faster on average on otherwise similar roads. So any accidents that do happen, will be more severe.

2. With less traffic on the road to force a driver to stay alert, it becomes easier to stop paying attention so more accidents result when something unexpected happens (like a Moose crossing the street).

3. Smaller population density means you are further from help. I get into an accident around my house and there's first responders there within minutes. Out in the middle of nowhere, it can take a long time for help to arrive. If you have a serious injury, that additional response time means the difference between life and death.

4. Less density and public transportation means people in red states drive more, thus more opportunities for an accident.

Last edited by bonzombiekitty; 20th November 2012 at 12:59 PM.
bonzombiekitty is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 01:31 PM   #6
Jim_MDP
Philosopher
 
Jim_MDP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: N.Cal/S.Or
Posts: 9,580
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
The proper metric is not deaths per 100,000 people, but deaths per 100,000 miles driven. Red states tend to be rural and thus I suspect that the average person drives a lot more miles than in urban, blue-states, where many take mass transit.

ETA: And even adjusted for that, it appears that rural driving in general is more dangerous. Look at New York's driving fatality rate, for example. Driving in rural areas is about 2-1/2 to 3 times more likely to result in a death per mile driven than in urban areas. I suspect that Unabogie is right; the main difference between rural and urban areas is probably the average speed.

And the can of beer in the drivers lap.

Sorry... had to say it.
__________________
----------------------
Anything goes in the Goblin hut... anything.

"Suggesting spurious explanations isn't relevant to my work." -- WTC Dust.
"Both cannot be simultaneously true, and so one may conclude neither is true, and if neither is true, then Apollo is fraudulent." -- Patrick1000.
Jim_MDP is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 01:43 PM   #7
Dancing David
Penultimate Amazing
 
Dancing David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,700
Originally Posted by Spindrift View Post
No this isn't about guns.

Apparently if you live in a red state there's a better chance that you will be killed in car accident.

Check out the chart in this link:
http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news...accidents?lite



The average for the USA is 10.63. Of the 24 states below that number only 3 voted red in the presidential election.
Well, my guess is it is a part of the rural life style. Hour long commutes either way on two lane blacktop. It seems that everyone who lives in a small town knows someone who died on the road.
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn
And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch
You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager
Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar
Dancing David is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 02:53 PM   #8
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
The proper metric is not deaths per 100,000 people, but deaths per 100,000 miles driven. Red states tend to be rural and thus I suspect that the average person drives a lot more miles than in urban, blue-states, where many take mass transit.

ETA: And even adjusted for that, it appears that rural driving in general is more dangerous. Look at New York's driving fatality rate, for example. Driving in rural areas is about 2-1/2 to 3 times more likely to result in a death per mile driven than in urban areas. I suspect that Unabogie is right; the main difference between rural and urban areas is probably the average speed.

Whatever metric gives red states a better name....

NoahFence is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 03:30 PM   #9
Baylor
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,394
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
The proper metric is not deaths per 100,000 people, but deaths per 100,000 miles driven. Red states tend to be rural and thus I suspect that the average person drives a lot more miles than in urban, blue-states, where many take mass transit.

ETA: And even adjusted for that, it appears that rural driving in general is more dangerous. Look at New York's driving fatality rate, for example. Driving in rural areas is about 2-1/2 to 3 times more likely to result in a death per mile driven than in urban areas. I suspect that Unabogie is right; the main difference between rural and urban areas is probably the average speed.
I'm surprised you're not siding with the liberals with an avatar like that.
Baylor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 03:44 PM   #10
Barber Shop
Critical Thinker
 
Barber Shop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 317
The real reason should be obvious...

It is very difficult to kill someone with a Prius.

A fully-loaded Ford F250 on the other hand...
__________________
"Berkeley Campus on Lockdown After Loose Pages of Wall Street Journal Found on Park Bench

http://www.theonion.com/article/berk...-wall-st-55815
Barber Shop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 04:10 PM   #11
JoeTheJuggler
Penultimate Amazing
 
JoeTheJuggler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 27,766
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
I wonder if that's a function of traffic? Heavy traffic = slower driving speeds, while open roads = speeders?
Or miles traveled per 100,000 population. The stat was given as accidents per 100,000 people and not per mile driven.

ETA: I suspect in places like Wyoming--lower population density--there are a lot more miles driven per capita.
__________________
"That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way." —Ponder Stibbons

Last edited by JoeTheJuggler; 20th November 2012 at 04:12 PM.
JoeTheJuggler is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 04:13 PM   #12
JoeTheJuggler
Penultimate Amazing
 
JoeTheJuggler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 27,766
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
The proper metric is not deaths per 100,000 people, but deaths per 100,000 miles driven.
This.

I think the stat given in the OP is nothing more than a substitute for more miles driven per capita.
__________________
"That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way." —Ponder Stibbons
JoeTheJuggler is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 05:12 PM   #13
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: USA! USA!
Posts: 24,384
This is relevant. Of course, it looks at the data nationally, not as an opportunity to dishonestly score political points.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 06:43 PM   #14
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,203
Originally Posted by UNLoVedRebel View Post
I'm surprised you're not siding with the liberals with an avatar like that.
He lost an Avatar bet....
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 06:48 PM   #15
The Fallen Serpent
Master Poster
 
The Fallen Serpent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,139
I agree with Brainster on the more useful metric.

The political affiliation of an area correlating to risk of driving deaths are likely not not casual, but both influenced by the same factor. The urban rural divide as already pointed out.
__________________
You don't use science to show that you are right, you use science to become right. - Randall Munroe
The Fallen Serpent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 06:49 PM   #16
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,203
I suspect that there are mutliple factors.

Long Drives - Rural people tend to drive longer distances meaning more change and fatigue
More People driving - Less public transport means more rual people drive
Faster Speeds - Open road vs urban road, also two lane vs highway
Less Law Enforcement - generally urban roads have law enforcement spread thinner
Seat Belt Laws - While the split seems 50/50 at a glance, secondary seat belt enforcement is a factor in many of the northern Red states
Drink Driving - Hate to say it but country folk tend to do this more then Urban, mostly because they drive everywhere, including the bars
Types of Vehicles - Rural drivers tend to have heavier vehicles than Urban ones, and do more damage. Often easier to loss control of too.
Road Conditions - Rural roads tend to be in worse states of repairs than urban ones.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)


Last edited by PhantomWolf; 20th November 2012 at 06:54 PM.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 06:57 PM   #17
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
Originally Posted by Spindrift View Post
No this isn't about guns.

Apparently if you live in a red state there's a better chance that you will be killed in car accident.

Check out the chart in this link:
http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news...accidents?lite



The average for the USA is 10.63. Of the 24 states below that number only 3 voted red in the presidential election.
I concur that it has a lot more to do with the time on the road than the homicidal tendencies of conservatives. (I'm not discounting those entirely, though. )

With the distances between the beer store, the bait and tackle shop, the ammo shop, the landfill/dump and Harley's Feed and Grain, they're on the road a lot longer and with only Hannity, Rush and Beck to keep them company and the six pack running down, it's hard to keep your attention on the road and watch out for illegal immigrants at the same time.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 06:59 PM   #18
Ausmerican
Illuminator
 
Ausmerican's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 3,490
Originally Posted by UNLoVedRebel View Post
I'm surprised you're not siding with the liberals with an avatar like that.
He lost a bet.
__________________
Everyone must believe in something. I believe I'll go canoeing. Henry David Thoreau
Ausmerican is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 07:06 PM   #19
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
 
rwguinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 11,098
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
I concur that it has a lot more to do with the time on the road than the homicidal tendencies of conservatives. (I'm not discounting those entirely, though. )

With the distances between the beer store, the bait and tackle shop, the ammo shop, the landfill/dump and Harley's Feed and Grain, they're on the road a lot longer and with only Hannity, Rush and Beck to keep them company and the six pack running down, it's hard to keep your attention on the road and watch out for illegal immigrants at the same time.
Ad homs noted. That the best you can *********** do? Insult me and those like me?
I don't drink, and don't know anybody who does drink while driving. If you're going to slur 50% of the population (less 2.6 million or so), do it somewhere where they agree with you.
(oops--this is JREF, where being anything other than a bleeding heart, antigun, tax-the-rich and educated, wide-open-spaces-hating, lemming loving, self-important and self-proclaimed "Bright" is reason for derision and insults.)
Don't liberal, urban jackasses ever let up?
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
"
I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275
rwguinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 07:21 PM   #20
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
Originally Posted by rwguinn View Post
Ad homs noted. That the best you can *********** do? Insult me and those like me?
I don't drink, and don't know anybody who does drink while driving. If you're going to slur 50% of the population (less 2.6 million or so), do it somewhere where they agree with you.
(oops--this is JREF, where being anything other than a bleeding heart, antigun, tax-the-rich and educated, wide-open-spaces-hating, lemming loving, self-important and self-proclaimed "Bright" is reason for derision and insults.)
Don't liberal, urban jackasses ever let up?
If you didn't get that I was parodying the type of arguments we throw around in Politics, I'm sorry.

I believe NOT ONE WORD of what I wrote. The huge grin with the comment about homicidal tendencies might've been a hint.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 09:27 PM   #21
Baylor
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,394
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
He lost an Avatar bet....
No ****.
Baylor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 09:46 PM   #22
MattusMaximus
Intellectual Gladiator
 
MattusMaximus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,948
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
The proper metric is not deaths per 100,000 people, but deaths per 100,000 miles driven. Red states tend to be rural and thus I suspect that the average person drives a lot more miles than in urban, blue-states, where many take mass transit.

ETA: And even adjusted for that, it appears that rural driving in general is more dangerous. Look at New York's driving fatality rate, for example. Driving in rural areas is about 2-1/2 to 3 times more likely to result in a death per mile driven than in urban areas. I suspect that Unabogie is right; the main difference between rural and urban areas is probably the average speed.
I think there's another factor to consider: if you live in a more remote and rural area and get into an accident, then it is necessarily going to take more time for help to get to you. And in the case of life-threatening injuries, just a few minutes can make all the difference.
__________________
Visit my blog: The Skeptical Teacher
"We ****** up the air, the water, we ****** up each other. Why don't we just finish the job by flushing our brains down the toilet?" -- John Trent, In the Mouth of Madness
MattusMaximus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 10:02 PM   #23
Beerina
Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions
 
Beerina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 32,812
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
The proper metric is not deaths per 100,000 people, but deaths per 100,000 miles driven. Red states tend to be rural and thus I suspect that the average person drives a lot more miles than in urban, blue-states, where many take mass transit.

ETA: And even adjusted for that, it appears that rural driving in general is more dangerous. Look at New York's driving fatality rate, for example. Driving in rural areas is about 2-1/2 to 3 times more likely to result in a death per mile driven than in urban areas. I suspect that Unabogie is right; the main difference between rural and urban areas is probably the average speed.
This doesn't even make sense -- they say you're more likely to die close to home in a car accident...because most driving is close to home. Yet the rural aspect belies that. By necessity they drive a lot more (and you'd also think they'd have thus better driving skill from practice) so, if they drive more, and die more, they'd thus die further from home.

Hence "you're more likely to die near home" would be wrong.
__________________
"Great innovations should not be forced [by way of] slender majorities." - Thomas Jefferson

The government should nationalize it! Socialized, single-payer video game development and sales now! More, cheaper, better games, right? Right?
Beerina is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2012, 10:56 PM   #24
Darth Rotor
Salted Sith Cynic
 
Darth Rotor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 38,527
Quote:
Living in a red state is dangerous
The go live somewhere else, lad.

I live in a so called "red state" and don't seem to have any trouble getting along, thanks very much.

Why do you think that is, Spindrift?
(Did you used to play Traveler by any chance? Name struck a very, very old chord).
__________________
Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission.
"Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis
Darth Rotor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st November 2012, 12:20 AM   #25
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
I went looking for cheap correlations (e.g. stuff I could find with minimum googling) but there's nothing in any of the following that explains away the facts reported in the article:

Drinking age - same in all states, now.
Age to obtain driver's license - some of the highest listed on the chart have higher license ages than others on the list.
No-fault insurance? No relationship, whatsoever.
Population density? A bit of a hit, but not much. At least five of the top road deaths per capita states were in states that made the bottom (or top) twenty in population density. Frankly, I expected this to be higher.
Bad weather? The states are spread too much to be able to blame winter driving conditions, for instance. And coastal rain and hurricanes might be a factor in MS, AL, SC - but not so much in Montana and Oklahoma.
Topography? A lot of the top 10 are flat (to flattish) but some are kinda mountainous.

So the jury's still out. I doubt the political connection, though. Notable at the bottom of the chart of fatalities are one metro area, Washington DC where traffic never gets above 30 mph and Massachusetts which has some of the strictest traffic ENFORCEMENT in the country (from anecdotal evidence, I must admit - all my friends who drove in the Northeast always said to be damned careful to follow all the rules when you were crossing Mass, 'cuz they enforce the laws very aggressively).

I suspect it's probably a combination of factors, maybe even obscure stuff for which statistics aren't readily available, like (say) amount spent on building up grades on curves or amount spent on maintenance or amount spent on enforcement. The lowest numbers, though, tend to be in states that have large urban centers. Since they counted per 100,000 head and not per person per miles driven, this makes sense in that in NYC, for instance, and many of the satellite communities around it, there's a much lower rate of car ownership (like DC, I'd be pretty sure). CA is the anomaly to that side, though, because LAX has such a notoriously useless public transit system that everybody needs a car.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st November 2012, 02:49 AM   #26
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 20,570
Okay, so I went to the NTSA site that I linked earlier and checked the states by accidents per 100,000 miles (2010 data except for Wisconsin and Wyoming, which only have 2009 as the most recent). The top states are still all red states:

Montana
Arkansas
South Carolina
West Virginia
Mississippi
South Dakota
Kentucky
Louisiana
Tennessee
Kansas
Oklahoma
Wyoming
New Mexico
Alabama
Pennsylvania is next on the list. But then I checked by rural deaths per 100 million miles and the rankings are:

Florida
South Carolina
Kansas
Arkansas
North Carolina
Delaware
Mississippi
Nevada
Oklahoma
Tennessee
Texas
Montana
West Virginia
Arizona
Louisiana
South Dakota
California

Still skewed red, but Florida leads , and Delaware is pretty reliable blue. Ranked by deaths per 100 million urban miles?

West Virginia
Kentucky
Tennessee
Pennsylvania
Alabama
Arizona
Nevada
Hawaii
Connecticut
Florida

Top three are all red states but after that it's pretty much a jumble; five of the top ten voted for Obama.

BTW, one thing clearly stands out; all states have improved their miles per fatality tremendously just in the last five years or so. Mississippi, for example, averaged 2.2 deaths per 100 million miles in 2006, and cut that to 1.61 in 2010, a 27% improvement. Indeed, looking at the numbers it appears that some of the worst states in 2010 would have been some of the best in 2006.

One oddity in the 2010 stats: Massachusetts shows .48 fatalities per 100 million rural miles, .55 fatalities per 100 million urban miles and .58 fatalities per 100 million miles overall. Obviously somebody screwed up the math there.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st November 2012, 02:56 AM   #27
uk_dave
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,154
Originally Posted by rwguinn View Post
Ad homs noted. That the best you can *********** do? Insult me and those like me?
I don't drink, and don't know anybody who does drink while driving. If you're going to slur 50% of the population (less 2.6 million or so), do it somewhere where they agree with you.
(oops--this is JREF, where being anything other than a bleeding heart, antigun, tax-the-rich and educated, wide-open-spaces-hating, lemming loving, self-important and self-proclaimed "Bright" is reason for derision and insults.)
Don't liberal, urban jackasses ever let up?
Yikes!! You really took that one personally?

And your bit after 'ooops'.... well, it's sad that you feel that way. I disagree with your assessment of this forum.
uk_dave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st November 2012, 03:10 AM   #28
The Fallen Serpent
Master Poster
 
The Fallen Serpent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,139
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
Top three are all red states but after that it's pretty much a jumble; five of the top ten voted for Obama.

BTW, one thing clearly stands out; all states have improved their miles per fatality tremendously just in the last five years or so. Mississippi, for example, averaged 2.2 deaths per 100 million miles in 2006, and cut that to 1.61 in 2010, a 27% improvement. Indeed, looking at the numbers it appears that some of the worst states in 2010 would have been some of the best in 2006.

One oddity in the 2010 stats: Massachusetts shows .48 fatalities per 100 million rural miles, .55 fatalities per 100 million urban miles and .58 fatalities per 100 million miles overall. Obviously somebody screwed up the math there.
I wonder if the recent 2010 drop has to do with the inclusion of anti-texting laws... I also recall states having recently created more strict DUI laws in the time frame as well. In Texas the anti-texting laws only apply to school zone type areas but I imagine it still had a noticable impact. I also imagine the drop in driving among the younger generations has impacted the deaths per 100k mile rate.

I find it grand how well we have done with improving traffic safety overall. My grandpa told me about how when he was younger in California that police would tell people found sleeping in a rest stop to get back on the road, and an instance where it happened to him he had a few close calls of blinking out behind the wheel trying to find a hotel. That just seems crazy to me. I have had instances where I started to drain quickly and pulled off to take a 2 hour nap in a rest stop when I was less than 2 hours from home.
__________________
You don't use science to show that you are right, you use science to become right. - Randall Munroe
The Fallen Serpent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st November 2012, 07:46 AM   #29
casebro
Penultimate Amazing
 
casebro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 19,788
Ethnicity? Them dark skinned ethnics is harder to see at night, maybe there is a day/night stat? ( this from an old anecdote from an old friend)

Or maybe we are confusing cause and effect? Perhaps political affiliation is caused by traffic death rates?

Amurican cars vs import badges?

Presence of agricultural machinery on the road?

Distracted by spittin chaw out the winder?

Drivers vision blocked by the straw he is chewing on?

Longer drives = more sex acts performed while driving? DWIP- driving while romantically influenced by poultry? Them chickens can get right riled up if they slips out of you grip...
__________________
Any sufficiently advanced idea is indistinguishable from idiocy to those who don't actually understanding the concept.
casebro is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st November 2012, 10:35 AM   #30
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
 
BenBurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one.
Posts: 37,538
Farm machinery is notoriously dangerous, as are logging and mining...
__________________
For what doth it profit a man, to fix one bug, but crash the system?
BenBurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st November 2012, 10:50 AM   #31
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
 
rwguinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 11,098
Originally Posted by uk_dave View Post
Yikes!! You really took that one personally?

And your bit after 'ooops'.... well, it's sad that you feel that way. I disagree with your assessment of this forum.
Considering the knee -jerk reactions to anything Texan, and the references to fundies which apparently are all who live in the red states, my asseseis on -target.
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
"
I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275
rwguinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st November 2012, 10:57 AM   #32
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 21,844
Originally Posted by rwguinn View Post
Don't liberal, urban jackasses ever let up?
How can one be a proper liberal urban jackass if one lets up?

A LUJ.

There, I've given you a proper acronym with which to disparage. No charge either; unless that's too commie.
Resume is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st November 2012, 01:16 PM   #33
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
 
rwguinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 11,098
Originally Posted by Resume View Post
How can one be a proper liberal urban jackass if one lets up?

A LUJ.

There, I've given you a proper acronym with which to disparage. No charge either; unless that's too commie.
Aha! Sou her wunna them long -haired, commie Pinko hippies, too! 8-D
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
"
I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275
rwguinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st November 2012, 01:27 PM   #34
The Fallen Serpent
Master Poster
 
The Fallen Serpent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,139
Originally Posted by Beerina View Post
This doesn't even make sense -- they say you're more likely to die close to home in a car accident...because most driving is close to home. Yet the rural aspect belies that. By necessity they drive a lot more (and you'd also think they'd have thus better driving skill from practice) so, if they drive more, and die more, they'd thus die further from home.

Hence "you're more likely to die near home" would be wrong.
Despite the greater distances driven it does not necessarily mean miles driven near the home are safer. All of the reasons for the danger of rural driving applies to driving near a rural home. Longer drive equals more exhaustion, further away from emergency assistance, less developed infrastructure, more dangerous vehicles, less caution, ect can easily be coupled with the reasons driving near home is more dangerous. I suspect overall rural residents have a smaller rate than an urban resident of dying near the home in a traffic incident, it can still be the near home portion of driving is still the most dangerous portion of a rural resident's drive.

Anecodatally, I can attest has a Texan driver that when I drunkenly drive my Hummer home through the rural DFW metroplex that the hardest part is stopping safely instead of crashing into my house or my oil well. And in case it wasn't obvious, this anecdote is a joke, getting a Hummer started not stopped is the hardest part of drinking this much.
__________________
You don't use science to show that you are right, you use science to become right. - Randall Munroe
The Fallen Serpent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st November 2012, 03:44 PM   #35
Debaser
Muse
 
Debaser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 806
The 'collision near home' thing is really a shorthand for 'collision on familiar roads'. It also works for rural areas of the UK, you find postcodes of victims are maybe three or five miles from the site of the collision.

People become complacent in their locality. They 'know' what the road will be like when they make their morning or evening commute. That there'll be no traffic because there hasn't been any on the 100's or even 1000's of other occasions they've travelled this route at this time, so they can maybe be a bit less rigourous about staying in their lane when taking that bend, say; until the day, of course, that there is a vehicle coming the other way.

If we all drove every road with as much caution as if it was the first time we had encountered it (much, much easier said than done) then we'd probably be as likely to have a collision within 50 miles of home as within five miles.


If our experience can be transferred to the US (always a minefield), it's rural, two-lane, high speed (60mph) roads which are the most dangerous. Head-on collisions are more likely and will happen at very high closing speeds, there's usually some sort of roadside impedimenta (notorious killers trees, but also telegraph poles and even large sign posts, etc.) and not much safety barrier protecting it, and has been stated, reaction times by the emergency services are that much longer, even if we have helicopter ambulances available the fire service will probably need to extricate victims and they have to use the road network.

Last edited by Debaser; 21st November 2012 at 03:53 PM. Reason: Added last paragraph.
Debaser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st November 2012, 06:58 PM   #36
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
To put this in perspective,...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ted_death_rate

And some of you guys just aren't trying! Check out the road deaths in some of the other countries of the world. (Western Europe is about half the rate of the USA, by the way.)

Evidently I live in a "red state". (Over here, that's the opposition to the ruling class, ironically.) So do you think there's hope for the GOP in Mauritania?
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2012, 12:54 AM   #37
uk_dave
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,154
I wonder how much can be put down to mechanical failure?

Looking at Foolmewunz link, it shows the UK having about 3.6/100000 fatalities, with the US on 12.3/100000

Now, in the UK we have a fairly strict inspection which has to be undertaken every year for cars more than 3 years old, and which covers things like tyre tread depth, condition of windscreen, operation of turn signals, lights etc.

Sometimes it can be a real pain to get a vehicle passed. But then again, when they do fail perhaps it's for reasons which wouldn't be apparent to casual inspection but could be fatal if left un-fixed?

But countries which don't require such testing, presumably have a greater number of un-roadworthy vehicles in daily use?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOT_test

Quote:
States without safety, emissions, or VIN inspections

Alaska [37]
Arkansas
Iowa
Kentucky
Michigan
Minnesota
Montana
North Dakota
South Carolina
South Dakota
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle..._United_States

Are these 'red' ones?
uk_dave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2012, 01:01 AM   #38
Baylor
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,394
Originally Posted by uk_dave View Post
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Baylor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2012, 01:19 AM   #39
The Fallen Serpent
Master Poster
 
The Fallen Serpent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,139
Yes, those are red states, but notice plenty of blue states lack any safety inspections as well. Only a third of the states require regular safety inspections and a number of them are very red states. Though they tend to be the more populous red states. I would expect the inspection requirement does have an affect. However you are also comparing rates per 100,000 people again, which isn't quite as informative. In the same link Uk is 5.7/billion km and the US is 8.5/billion km. The UK performs better by that metric but not by as much.
__________________
You don't use science to show that you are right, you use science to become right. - Randall Munroe
The Fallen Serpent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2012, 04:36 AM   #40
Debaser
Muse
 
Debaser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 806
Originally Posted by uk_dave View Post
I wonder how much can be put down to mechanical failure?
Surprisingly few. The vast majority of collisions (over 50%) are attributable to human error.

(BTW, in the industry we now tend to call them the perhaps more brutal 'collisions' or 'crashes' rather than 'accidents'. 'Accident' has the conotation of "whoops, deary me, spilt the sugar again" nobody or nothing is at fault, something just happened, which generally isn't the case in road collisions/crashes).
Debaser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:09 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.