Skip to comments.
Child traffic deaths at an all-time low, overall fatalities remain flat
Associated Press ^
| 4-22-02
| NEDRA PICKLER
Posted on 04/22/2002 9:10:17 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:40:10 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
WASHINGTON (AP) --
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: child; trafficdeaths
Drive SUV's, "for the children"?
To: Oldeconomybuyer
Note that "children" means under 16 to the car fatality crowd, but under 20 to the gun fatality crowd. Nothing like padding statistics to get the result you want. Just as in the case of gun fatalities, car fatalities would skyrocket if late teens were included - especially since this age group includes newly licensed drivers who are the most dangerous group on the road.
2
posted on
04/22/2002 9:17:18 AM PDT
by
coloradan
To: coloradan
car fatalities would skyrocket if late teens were included - especially since this age group includes newly licensed drivers who are the most dangerous group on the road. Teen drivers are danderous to themselves and their passengers moreso than to others on the road. If memory serves me right, most accidents resulting in death where a teenager is at the wheel are one car accidents.
Bluehairs are probably the most dangerous drivers on the road to other drivers.
To: Oldeconomybuyer
"...laws requiring that children be belted ..." OH,if that were only true,I know of a few that desperately need it. ;-)
NHTSA said the overall number of traffic fatalities dropped slightly, from 41,321 in 2000 to 41,730 in 2001
Huh?
To: Oldeconomybuyer
I'm sorry to report that, overall, the death rate remains at 100%.. |
To: Oldeconomybuyer
I've dealt with traffic accident statistics enough times to realize that a reduction in traffic deaths doesn't mean all that much in terms of vehicle safety, etc. unless it is accompanied by overall non-fatal accident figures. One of the reasons for this reduction in deaths is the constant improvement in emergency medical care -- people are surviving accidents today that would have killed them 10 years ago.
To: coloradan
I agree!!! Also,I think the numbers just might mean that "kids" aren't traveling with parents as much anymore.....let's check the numbers on "kids" present in all accidents first before they praise their 5% on seatbelt laws...gawd I hate $%^^&^^% statistics!
To: Oldeconomybuyer
Overall traffic deaths remain "flat", eh? Heh heh heh.
8
posted on
04/22/2002 9:41:23 AM PDT
by
Timesink
To: Minnesoootan
When you count the rise in population it is a decrease I would assume.
9
posted on
04/22/2002 9:43:57 AM PDT
by
Cleburne
To: Oldeconomybuyer
"NHTSA said the overall number of traffic fatalities dropped slightly, from 41,321 in 2000 to 41,730 in 2001."
Hmmm ... Must be the "new math" taught in government schools.
10
posted on
04/22/2002 10:03:47 AM PDT
by
moyden
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson