You must log in or register to comment.
Incorrect use of whom. Who kills who (accusative case). Who gets killed by whom (dative case).
It’s the objective case, i.e. everything that isn’t nominative, so this usage would be correct. We don’t have a real distinction between accusative and dative in modern english.
That being said, I’m a descriptivist who is strongly of the opinion that ‘who’ is always correct and ‘whom’ is archaic.
My goal in life is to be that one pedestrian who takes out a car.
Mad props for the cyclist too
Yeah how did that even happen? Like was it a really buff guy or a really flimsy car?
That was Chuck Norris
Car crashed into a building, killed a pedestrian on the way. Any number of scenarios. Doesn’t mean the pedestrian survived.
When a pedestrian collides into another pedestrian and kills them, that’s called “a fist fight.”
Mmmh, I would suppose that to be counted in this statistic they’d need to run at each other really fast and somehow manage to kill each other (or at least one person). Like jousting or goats or something?
Don’t underestimate how easily one can die, if you fall just the wrong way, it can happen. Particularly older folks.
I’d pay to watch bicycle jousting.
Segways too.
Not really. Imagine 2 people walking at a brisk pace walking into each other, eg around a corner. Might kill someone. Usually that’s fine, but sometimes you have bad lick.
A great case for why data normalization is so important.
Looking at the chart like this with non-normalized data you might conclude that riding around on a scooter makes you near invincible compared to walking even if hit by a car.
Whereas what’s really being shown is more people walk than ride scooters.
Yeah, I’m really wondering how push scooters cause more pedestrian fatalities than bicycles. Motorized scooters, I understand, but how the hell does a push scooter have enough mass and speed to kill twice as many people?
Yes, but the downside is that you only ever get to kill pedestrians /s
That pedestrian who killed a driver is a badass and ill buy them a bottle of their fav sparkling white; i don’t even care.
I guess they died as well.
Buying a french person a bottle of sparkling white would probably kill them
Champaigne is a particular sparkling white.
Other places in france also make it.
Yes and most people don’t buy the actual champagne stuff except maybe for special occasions because a nice crémant does the same job for 1/5th the price.
i want more information on the other v other incidents. is this like, clown unicycle vs pogo stick?
Looks like I need to buy a scooter, a van, or an other
Van/lorry kills more cars than they kill other vans/lorries. Top dog in the race to the bottom.
Very curious about the three “question mark vs question mark” fatalities. UFO collision? Skateboard jousting?
I get that the implicated conclusion here is that cars are orders of magnitude more dangerous. This is true, but I wonder how much this data is being skewed because more people drive cars rather than walk.
From the numbers its sort of implied that these are not per population but rather total numbers which is generally meaningless because some areas are metropolitan and others are long country roads.
Its curious ish but not really a reasonable comparison. Who records people vs people collisions? And in how many people vs people collisions is a knife involved?
Anyway absolute numbers are not particularly interesting, per population per area sounds more useful to give real context. However i will also take this opportunity to say “fuck cars” because over this side of the pond those shitty overcompensating shit trucks with their bull bars should be banned and removed from the road. Absolute death traps and don’t fit into our parking spots
This is in France. Los of people walk rather than drive. It would be interesting to see the numbers adjusted for number of trips, though.
I think adjusting for travelled distance would give more insight.
I disagree. For example, you might take your car for a trip to a big box store outside of town, but you might take your bike or walk to shop for groceries at your local supermarket. So even if you adjust for number of trips, the car will naturally account for a much larger distance.
In my opinion it is much more interesting to know how likely you are to be injured or killed on any given trip than, say, every 100 km of walking or driving.
Not to say that adjusting for distance can never be useful, but in this case I’m not sure it would add as much meaning.
You would be surprised. I would take a bet against you that collectively more distance is completed on foot than in “cars” in france
I had to double-read your comment there. There is not a single able-bodied person who is not a pedestrian. However, probably only 50% of them drives.
How do you think people get to their cars?
Headline tomorrow: “Other Hits Other. Three Dead.”
This is the sort of chart that should be put in front of children. It’s interesting to read and well designed. And it’s funny to imagine two people bumping into each other being fit for such a chart.
And it has just enough complexity to be at least a bit fascinating to most kids, and especially spectrum kids.
Aight, I’m gonna need this in relative/conditional frequencies rather than absolute ones.
So, a pedestrian collided with a car and the car was the fatality?
Maybe the airbag was unsupportive in this case.
I’m sure the pedestrian also didn’t survive that scenario.
But yeah this data is a bit confusing.
What’s “other”? Alien craft?
For the last row, it might be people using e.g. inline skates, skateboards or non-electrical scooters.
For the last column, it could also be unknown vehicle (hit and run).Edit: Busses aren’t included in the chart as a separate category either, so they’re also in the “others” category.
Turtle dropped from sky
Need fewer 4+ wheeled death cages, more walking / biking infrastructure, more and better public transit, and more significant barriers between them.
