I think people are better drivers than we give them credit for

Driving around today getting errands done, I got to witness the usual symptoms of bad drivers, wandering in and out of lanes, running red lights, bad park jobs, blocking traffic while trying to turn against traffic, and every other bad example of driving you can give... but not a single accident.

If people were truly as bad at driving as we think, the carnage would be incredible.

I always think its a zero sum game. For every numb-nuts out there, there is another with the reflexes to avoid them.

Appleseed wrote: I always think its a zero sum game. For every numb-nuts out there, there is another with the reflexes to avoid them.

THIS!!!

While the masses may not care about their driving skill, or even their knowledge of the rules of the road, most people do have a pretty good sense of self-preservation, and generally try to avoid destroying what it typically their primary mode of transportation.

At one time the US was at the top in terms of fewest motor vehicle related deaths (back in the 80s). We killed on average 50,000 a year. Now we are ranked in the bottom half of countries that keep these statistics. The UK is in the top three and Germany in the top ten. I mention these cause they have similar driver profiles to ours. The UK saw an 80% drop in deaths in the same time, Germany about 60% drop, where the US only had a 32% drop. Yes we kill fewer on the roads today then we used to (about 32000) but our rates of death are much worse and actually trending back up. The difference? The UK and Germany and many other nations instituted tough driving tests and instruction. The US? We made our tests easier if we changed them at all. If we had kept pace we would only suffer 10-12,000 deaths a year. Something to consider the next time your legislator passes up the opportunity to make getting a license tougher.

I spend 5 days a week on the roads with students. They will point out to me the bad habits they see. Not to mention the crap they see their parents doing. With the advent of the smart phones we've dumbed down our driving and allowed distraction to become the order of the day as some 80% of all fatalities can be attributed to distracted driving: eating, talking on a mobile device (hands free or not), texting and emailing, searching for stuff, pets, passengers, etc. There are days I feel like I'm banging my head against the walls. And it's not because of the students. It's the rest of the adults in their lives who either don't care to or don't know to change what they do. Before they get to me most students have spent 15 or 16 years learning bad habits from their parents, aunts and uncles, grandparents, etc. You want them to get better? Get better yourself and model the habits you expect me to teach them. I only get 30 hours of classroom time and 6 hours of in-car time. I really don't have a chance against those odds.

/rant

you bring up a good point VWCorvette. I attribute most of our deaths to distracted driving.. I wish they would treat cellphone use like a DUI

I saw two accidents today. I was only on the roads for a grand total of 25 minutes.

I think people are worse drivers than 20 years ago. More distractions, more ME!!!! attitude/aggression, coupled with greater traffic density. The saving grace is that cars are so much better now.

All of what VWCorvette says I'm seeing with my son and his friends as they all start learning to drive.

Should be: "I think people are luckier than we give them credit for."

A lapse of attention here, an unsafe maneuver there and sure, maybe the only result is other road users get pissed off.

But... all it takes is one episode of bad or careless driving in the wrong place/time/condition and then someone dies.

Soon enough, most of the people that can't put their phones down behind the wheel will be riding around in self-driving cars and it won't matter that they can't peel themselves away from their tiny screens.

I recall hearing some survey where something like 85% of people thought that they were above average drivers, so there's lots of denial and delusion going on.

I strongly support at a minimum, having to re-take the written portion of the driving exam every time one gets their license renewed, so that they'd at least have to think for a moment about all the laws they break during their daily commute, such as turning into the far lane, changing lanes in an intersection, failing to signal, etc.

Even better would be actual driving tests every time, but that's probably not going to happen.

In reply to RX8driver:

I think most people don't actually know what it means to be a "good" driver. Blame it on our driver education systems.

Don't forget the racers who think that driving skills apply in traffic.

Most common problem I see is tunnel vision. People who don't notice anything unless its straight ahead in the middle of the road. They don't notice the deer watching them drive by, the trailer with the tire about to blow, the accident occuring the other lane, that kind of stuff.

PHeller wrote: Don't forget the racers who think that driving skills apply in traffic.

I'm confused. Don't most driving skills (like looking ahead) apply in traffic? Or is that comment in reference to the folks who think the road is their private race track.

BlueInGreen44 wrote:

PHeller wrote: Don't forget the racers who think that driving skills apply in traffic.

I'm confused. Don't most driving skills (like looking ahead) apply in traffic? Or is that comment in reference to the folks who think the road is their private race track.

This. Or just that folks thing because they've been on track (drag, dirt, road, autox,whatever) that they can drive like an idiot. Usually that isn't the case, but there is a lot more to driving on roads than car control.

Situational awareness on the road, whether it's in dense traffic or on a deserted country road, is more important than racing skills. Sometimes my wife derides me for not paying attention to what she's saying while I'm driving. ("Did you hear what I just said or are you ignoring me again"). But it's only because I'm focused on the situation.

mad_machine wrote: you bring up a good point VWCorvette. I attribute most of our deaths to distracted driving.. I wish they would treat cellphone use like a DUI

Most of you have probably seen it, but Mythbusters did an episode on texting vs. drunk driving and found that the inebriated were better drivers. I'm sure there could be some arguments around how much they had to drink (i.e. not enough), but the point was what is considered "over the limit" was generally safer than texting. Personally, I find that pretty easy to believe.

Another thing that may be affecting those statistics is average speed within a country. I would hazard to guess that both in Germany and Britain, increased urban density in the years discussed has resulted in lower average speeds (both from in-town speed limits and traffic congestion) than those seen in our much more open country. While our average speed may have come down some as well, I suspect the two others have seen it more as they are more space-limited as countries. Higher average speeds would probably mean higher fatality rates, statistically.

Matt B wrote:

mad_machine wrote: you bring up a good point VWCorvette. I attribute most of our deaths to distracted driving.. I wish they would treat cellphone use like a DUI

Most of you have probably seen it, but Mythbusters did an episode on texting vs. drunk driving and found that the inebriated were better drivers. I'm sure there could be some arguments around how much they had to drink (i.e. not enough), but the point was what is considered "over the limit" was generally safer than texting. Personally, I find that pretty easy to believe.

For sure. And the laws against it have stopped some of the texting, but probably not even 50%. And those 50% are now even worse than they were before, because they're trying to hide it.

How long does it take you to text? About 5 seconds a text, maybe? Next time you're driving down the road, close your eyes for 5 seconds. Does that feel safe? It is about the same thing as what happens when you text and drive.

PHeller wrote:

BlueInGreen44 wrote:

PHeller wrote: Don't forget the racers who think that driving skills apply in traffic.

I'm confused. Don't most driving skills (like looking ahead) apply in traffic? Or is that comment in reference to the folks who think the road is their private race track.

This. Or just that folks thing because they've been on track (drag, dirt, road, autox,whatever) that they can drive like an idiot. Usually that isn't the case, but there is a lot more to driving on roads than car control.

Gotcha. I'd say there's also a lot more to being on a track than just car control but I agree with what you're saying.

I'm a racer and track driver and I have to say, my driving has gotten better and less aggressive the more time I spend on track.

That said, I'm usually able to move more assertively and quickly due to understanding the size of my vehicle, how quickly it can react and that I'm looking ahead and watching traffic patterns.

I've also better managed unexpected circumstances like black ice, red light running drivers and I've learned mechanical empathy such that I notice changes in pavement, tire inflation, suspension, various noises and braking performance.

The people I see driving way too aggressively on the street are generally clueless and really poor drivers who think they are driving quickly. I've seen so-called "Racers" who are really just drifters, drag racers and track-day drivers who have not learned proper driving skills and only really know to go fast in a straight line and occasionally get the back end to slide out. They are the ones that complain about being caught driving too quickly or recklessly, when many the of the rest of us are moving fairly quickly on the same roads, but we tend to follow the flow of traffic much more closely and don't make aggressive moves (unless we need to) so we don't piss people off and we don't draw attention to ourselves.

There are 200 million drivers in the US. There are 6 million accidents each year, with only half of them being injury accidents and a tiny fraction of those are fatal. What that means is only 3% of drivers are getting into accidents each year. 97% of drivers are NOT getting into accidents, and most of them NEVER get into accidents. It's why insurance companies can rake in the money and post record profits each year. Most drivers are actually pretty safe.

So, basically: 97% of drivers don't get into accidents. 1.5% get into accidents that are property damage only, 1.5% get into injury accidents, and .0002% get into fatal accidents.

It's really easy to be part of the 97% that aren't getting into accidents. And if you can't be, it's not that hard to mitigate the accident to be part of the group that is property damage only.

And then there's this.

"Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for U.S. teens."

"Young people ages 15-24 represent only 14% of the U.S. population. However, they account for 30% ($19 billion) of the total costs of motor vehicle injuries among males and 28% ($7 billion) of the total costs of motor vehicle injuries among females."

So most drivers are pretty safe but America still does a poor job of preparing the young to drive.

And then there are the people who get in more than one accident per year and skew the statistics

In reply to vwcorvette: I agree 100% that we need a driving test that isn't a joke. Half of the test when I took it (about 8 years ago) was devoted to nit picky terms instead of real lessons.

However I also think those statistics aren't totally fair. How many of their young drivers even bother to get a driver's license? The transportation system over there is substantially more usable. I wouldn't be surprised if the young driver segment is where a large portion of the difference in rates lies.

In reply to Chris_V:

97% of drivers are not in reported collisions. That's different than not having them. I'd be surprised if a third of the collisions in NYC were reported.