Skip to comments.NHTSA Data Confirms Traffic Fatalities Increased In 2012
Posted on 02/26/2014 8:03:43 PM PST by Red6
WASHINGTON The U.S. Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) today released the 2012 Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) data indicating that highway deaths increased to 33,561 in 2012, which is 1,082 more fatalities than in 2011. The majority of the increase in deaths, 72 percent, occurred in the first quarter of the year. Most of those involved were motorcyclists and pedestrians.
While the newly released data announced today marks the first increase since 2005, highway deaths over the past five years continue to remain at historic lows. Fatalities in 2011 were at the lowest level since 1949 and even with this slight increase in 2012, we are still at the same level of fatalities as 1950. Early estimates on crash fatalities for the first half of 2013 indicate a decrease in deaths compared to the same timeframe in 2012.
"Highway deaths claim more than 30,000 lives each year and while we've made substantial progress over the past 50 years, it's clear that we have much more work to do," said U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. "As we look to the future, we must focus our efforts to tackle persistent and emerging issues that threaten the safety of motorists, cyclists and pedestrians across the nation."
(Excerpt) Read more at nhtsa.gov ...
The article mentions a lot of contributing factors, but the increase in fuel efficient compact and mini/sub compact cars isn't even mentioned.
You know, the cars that will save us all from the impending global warming apocalypse. The cars that CNN says we all should own because the Europeans do.
I'm just saying, do you think that maybe, just possibly, it could be that mass and being able to trade space for energy absorption in a real accident (not a 35 MPH lab test) might play a slight role in the outcome? Is it possible that those vehicles that don't do so well in roll over tests and are high actually end up on top in a real bad collision (pun intended), and the people on bottom end up 6 feet lower?
I mean, I'm not a rocket scientist like those experts in the gubbermint, but could it just possibly be that a vehicle designed to haul 1 ton and weighing in at 7,000 pounds has a slightly more massive frame and that in an impact might do bad things with the 1,800 pound Mitsubishi sub compact that passed the government safety test and gets really, I mean really, good MPG?
Can someone help me please? What does the "m" stand for in that equation? Inelastic collisions.
The government needs to simply ban automobiles.
They should ban those crotch rockets.
Am increase in accidents involving pedestrians and motorcyclists tells me that drivers of automobiles are not paying attention and are running into things that are more easily unseen when attention is focused on texting or other similar distractions.
Maybe it means the invisible, Motorcyclists and Pedestrians, should pay more attention to those things which can kill them?
Personally, this report smacks of being manipulated to suit someone’s preordained agenda.
I don’t recall pedestrians being involved in previous reports and if I were to drill down into the numbers it wouldn’t surprise me to learn they are including incidents that were not previously included....
Motorcyclists and pedestrians seem to be most of the increase.
Yeah. Motorcyclists and pedestrians should not go anywhere near a road that might have a car driver doing 45 plus while texting. I don’t think a pedestrian has much of a chance jumping out of the way of a car that suddenly veers toward them. I guess you have never seen someone hit by someone texting and zooming along unaware that they have crossed onto the shoulder.
Well, you should be so lucky as to experience the arrogant A-holes of San Francisco who, by virtue of existence alone, deeply believe they are entitled to the road and everyone should watch out for them.
My Momma always said “Look both ways before you cross”...
Oh, and the insane bicyclists that show up on the last Friday of every month purposely putting themselves in harms way and pounding on peoples cars.
I don’t go to the city until after dark on those days, when they eventually hibernate....
..............The U.S. Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA...........
How many of the tens of thousands of the toadies at the NHTSA were needed to compile these statistics from the thousands of counties tasked to compile statistics,
that are tasked to collect data from the tens of thousands of towns that must report the accident, probable cause, persons involved, injured, dead, and check off a 2000 question questionnaire relating to the accident?
Just how much money can we as a country, waste?
Jim, he’s dead!
Speaking of insane bicyclists, have you seen the Portlandia bike rider clip?
Now that’s funny!
Obviously, the cause was Global Warming. The warming climate allows more motorcyclists and pedestrians to be out in the winter. The fix: force people to buy smaller and less safe cars.
BTW actual FARS data proves that upwards of 5000 people per year DIE due to fuel economy standards.
Spot on. This isn’t news. It’s an editorial. Like: we need more speed cameras, dedicated bike lanes, etc.
Isn’t that crazy?
High energy costs push people to use scooters, motorcycles, and into compact cars, and we see an increase in fatalities and serious injuries, 2012 being the first such “increase” in 20 years!
Technology and advances in design have made cars generally safer, up until recent. The push for higher fuel economy can only be achieved at the pace the government is pushing it along (Cafe standards, and energy policies that allow fuel prices to climb) by shedding weight. So you end up with a Smart car which has an airbag, crumple zones, three point seat belt, and all that really means is that someone can use a spatula to scrape you off that airbag when a F350 plows over you.