Road deaths hit new low which factor has had the most impact
Poll: Road deaths hit new low which factor has had the most impact
Total Members Polled: 247
Discussion
It's a multi-factor issue but which factor matters most?
From the latest LTT.
Road deaths at lowest ever levels
Road deaths have fallen to the lowest level since official records began in 1926, according to the latest DfT report on road casualties in Great Britain. 1,713 people were killed in road accidents that were reported to the police in 2013, which was 2% down on 2012 and half the number reported in 2000.
Car occupants accounted for 785 fatalities in 2013, or 46% of all fatalities (down 2% on the previous year): next came 398 pedestrians (down 5%); 331 motorcyclists (up 1%); 109 pedal cyclists (down 8%); and 90 in the catch-all ‘other’ category (up 3%).
Pedal cyclist deaths continue to fall (following the long-term trend) but the number has roughly fluctuated between 100 and 120 over the last six years. The highest annual figure for cycle fatalities was 1,536 back in 1934, and the lowest recorded number of fatalities was 104 in 2009.
The number of deaths attributed to drink driving on the part of one or more of the participants was put at 230 in 2012, a total not significantly different from the two previous years.
21,657 people were seriously injured in 2013, 6% less than in 2012, and 43% lower than 2000. The number of serious injuries has steadily declined since 2000 (apart from 2010/11). 160,300 people were slightly injured in 2013, 6% down on the previous year.
The total number of reported casualties was also down: There were 183,670 cases in 2013, 6% less than 2012. The total number of all casualties in Great Britain, including those not reported to the police, fell within the 630,000 to 800,000 range and is estimated to be around 720,000.
Vehicle traffic levels remain broadly stable but slightly increased by 0.4% between 2012 and 2013. The general downward trend in casualty statistics is partly attributed by the DfT to meteorological factors – the extended snowfall in 2010 and the heavy rainfall in 2012 are, for example, believed to have deterred more vulnerable road users from taking to the streets.
From the latest LTT.
Road deaths at lowest ever levels
Road deaths have fallen to the lowest level since official records began in 1926, according to the latest DfT report on road casualties in Great Britain. 1,713 people were killed in road accidents that were reported to the police in 2013, which was 2% down on 2012 and half the number reported in 2000.
Car occupants accounted for 785 fatalities in 2013, or 46% of all fatalities (down 2% on the previous year): next came 398 pedestrians (down 5%); 331 motorcyclists (up 1%); 109 pedal cyclists (down 8%); and 90 in the catch-all ‘other’ category (up 3%).
Pedal cyclist deaths continue to fall (following the long-term trend) but the number has roughly fluctuated between 100 and 120 over the last six years. The highest annual figure for cycle fatalities was 1,536 back in 1934, and the lowest recorded number of fatalities was 104 in 2009.
The number of deaths attributed to drink driving on the part of one or more of the participants was put at 230 in 2012, a total not significantly different from the two previous years.
21,657 people were seriously injured in 2013, 6% less than in 2012, and 43% lower than 2000. The number of serious injuries has steadily declined since 2000 (apart from 2010/11). 160,300 people were slightly injured in 2013, 6% down on the previous year.
The total number of reported casualties was also down: There were 183,670 cases in 2013, 6% less than 2012. The total number of all casualties in Great Britain, including those not reported to the police, fell within the 630,000 to 800,000 range and is estimated to be around 720,000.
Vehicle traffic levels remain broadly stable but slightly increased by 0.4% between 2012 and 2013. The general downward trend in casualty statistics is partly attributed by the DfT to meteorological factors – the extended snowfall in 2010 and the heavy rainfall in 2012 are, for example, believed to have deterred more vulnerable road users from taking to the streets.
I voted other because I believe jam plays a significant role in these findings. People these days eat less jam & although jam sales may be up because there is now more people eating jam than there used to be, people per head are eating less year by year. When I was young there was jam everywhere, there was jam doughnuts, jam sandwiches, jammie dodgers, cream teas with jam, jam rolls, swiss roles with jam & loads of other jam based products.
Road casualties have fallen in line with society's change in taste away from jam products, there is an obvious correlation between the two that is hard to ignore. One course of action may be to limit jam consumption to maybe a few units per week for adults & maybe an outright ban of jam at schools & especially universities where most students are financially challenged so therefore will buy more jam than other people.
With the above recommendations in place I think we could see road casualties fluctuate approximately plus or minus 2% over the coming years.
Road casualties have fallen in line with society's change in taste away from jam products, there is an obvious correlation between the two that is hard to ignore. One course of action may be to limit jam consumption to maybe a few units per week for adults & maybe an outright ban of jam at schools & especially universities where most students are financially challenged so therefore will buy more jam than other people.
With the above recommendations in place I think we could see road casualties fluctuate approximately plus or minus 2% over the coming years.
Long-term change in these stats are always interesting.
First: there's far more congestion. It leads to lower average vehicle speeds, less potential energy in vehicles involved in collisions and therefore lowered likelihood of fatality.
Second: far better primary and secondary safety in vehicles (now for pedestrians, too) means that like-for-like, there's better protection for those involved.
Third: the brilliance of A&E staff, Fire Service/paramedic/air ambulance services, etc in getting better and faster treatment for those injured and at risk of death. This means that some of those injuries which would have resulted in death 10 years ago are now survivable.
First: there's far more congestion. It leads to lower average vehicle speeds, less potential energy in vehicles involved in collisions and therefore lowered likelihood of fatality.
Second: far better primary and secondary safety in vehicles (now for pedestrians, too) means that like-for-like, there's better protection for those involved.
Third: the brilliance of A&E staff, Fire Service/paramedic/air ambulance services, etc in getting better and faster treatment for those injured and at risk of death. This means that some of those injuries which would have resulted in death 10 years ago are now survivable.
mygoldfishbowl said:
I voted other because I believe jam plays a significant role in these findings. People these days eat less jam & although jam sales may be up because there is now more people eating jam than there used to be, people per head are eating less year by year. When I was young there was jam everywhere, there was jam doughnuts, jam sandwiches, jammie dodgers, cream teas with jam, jam rolls, swiss roles with jam & loads of other jam based products.
Road casualties have fallen in line with society's change in taste away from jam products, there is an obvious correlation between the two that is hard to ignore. One course of action may be to limit jam consumption to maybe a few units per week for adults & maybe an outright ban of jam at schools & especially universities where most students are financially challenged so therefore will buy more jam than other people.
With the above recommendations in place I think we could see road casualties fluctuate approximately plus or minus 2% over the coming years.
+1. Can't fault the logic. Road casualties have fallen in line with society's change in taste away from jam products, there is an obvious correlation between the two that is hard to ignore. One course of action may be to limit jam consumption to maybe a few units per week for adults & maybe an outright ban of jam at schools & especially universities where most students are financially challenged so therefore will buy more jam than other people.
With the above recommendations in place I think we could see road casualties fluctuate approximately plus or minus 2% over the coming years.
Does marmalade count as jam?
REALIST123 said:
mygoldfishbowl said:
I voted other because I believe jam plays a significant role in these findings. People these days eat less jam & although jam sales may be up because there is now more people eating jam than there used to be, people per head are eating less year by year. When I was young there was jam everywhere, there was jam doughnuts, jam sandwiches, jammie dodgers, cream teas with jam, jam rolls, swiss roles with jam & loads of other jam based products.
Road casualties have fallen in line with society's change in taste away from jam products, there is an obvious correlation between the two that is hard to ignore. One course of action may be to limit jam consumption to maybe a few units per week for adults & maybe an outright ban of jam at schools & especially universities where most students are financially challenged so therefore will buy more jam than other people.
With the above recommendations in place I think we could see road casualties fluctuate approximately plus or minus 2% over the coming years.
+1. Can't fault the logic. Road casualties have fallen in line with society's change in taste away from jam products, there is an obvious correlation between the two that is hard to ignore. One course of action may be to limit jam consumption to maybe a few units per week for adults & maybe an outright ban of jam at schools & especially universities where most students are financially challenged so therefore will buy more jam than other people.
With the above recommendations in place I think we could see road casualties fluctuate approximately plus or minus 2% over the coming years.
This thread could rapidly be Going Underground.
Edited by NailedOn on Saturday 4th October 16:05
Mk3Spitfire said:
Vehicle safety features have definitely impacted massively.
It's strange, with regards to RTC's, they are usually fatalities, or minor injuries. In my experience, anything inbetween is rare.
One of the problems with this method of assessment is that there are still loads of accidents in the same location that cause massive congestion & disruption regularly that don't get recorded properly or accurately so therefore don't meet value management criteria to get works done It's strange, with regards to RTC's, they are usually fatalities, or minor injuries. In my experience, anything inbetween is rare.
t at driving now as they always were. The cars are amazingly better at keeping the idiots inside alive when they inevitably drive it into a hedge.Mk3Spitfire said:
Vehicle safety features have definitely impacted massively.
It's strange, with regards to RTC's, they are usually fatalities, or minor injuries. In my experience, anything inbetween is rare.
My brother has been a paramedic for many years and said that nowadays he rarely sees blood flowing at most of the RTCs that he attends compared to 70's & 80's when there would usually be someone bleeding even after fairly minor collisions.It's strange, with regards to RTC's, they are usually fatalities, or minor injuries. In my experience, anything inbetween is rare.
The economic climate has depressed car mileage in recent years, and there has been an ongoing shift to a higher proportion of motorway mileage. I'd like to see the figures adjusted for mileage.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...
ESP has massively reduced single vehicle accidents, especially those that would have resulted in nastier crashes.
Crash worthyness has improved massively recently, its pretty hard to be seriously injured in almost any modern car these days at the average 40mph speeds most people seem to do
I'd love to see what percentage of all KSI accidents involve cars without ESP/Airbags/NCAP ratings below 3 etc. Eg youngsters in their crap 90's Corsa's etc
Crash worthyness has improved massively recently, its pretty hard to be seriously injured in almost any modern car these days at the average 40mph speeds most people seem to do
I'd love to see what percentage of all KSI accidents involve cars without ESP/Airbags/NCAP ratings below 3 etc. Eg youngsters in their crap 90's Corsa's etc
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff