There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?
Recent Articles
- Justice for Indigenous Peoples is Long Overdueby Ryan McGreal, published June 30, 2021 in Commentary
(0 comments)
- Third-Party Election Advertising Ban About Silencing Workersby Chantal Mancini, published June 29, 2021 in Politics
(0 comments)
- Did Doug Ford Test the 'Great Barrington Declaration' on Ontarians?by Ryan McGreal, published June 29, 2021 in Special Report: COVID-19
(1 comment)
- An Update on Raise the Hammerby Ryan McGreal, published June 28, 2021 in Site Notes
(0 comments)
- Nestlé Selling North American Water Bottling to an Private Equity Firmby Doreen Nicoll, published February 23, 2021 in Healing Gaia
(0 comments)
- Jolley Old Sam Lawrenceby Sean Burak, published February 19, 2021 in Special Report: Cycling
(0 comments)
- Right-Wing Extremism is a Driving Force in Modern Conservatismby Ryan McGreal, published February 18, 2021 in Special Report: Extremism
(0 comments)
- Municipalities Need to Unite against Ford's Firehose of Land Use Changesby Michelle Silverton, published February 16, 2021 in Special Report
(0 comments)
- Challenging Doug Ford's Pandemic Narrativeby Ryan McGreal, published January 25, 2021 in Special Report: COVID-19
(1 comment)
- The Year 2020 Has Been a Wakeup Callby Michael Nabert, published December 31, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- The COVID-19 Marshmallow Experimentby Ryan McGreal, published December 22, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- All I Want for Christmas, 2020by Kevin Somers, published December 21, 2020 in Entertainment and Sports
(1 comment)
- Hamilton Shelters Remarkably COVID-19 Free Thanks to Innovative Testing Programby Jason Allen, published December 21, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- Province Rams Through Glass Factory in Stratfordby Doreen Nicoll, published December 21, 2020 in Healing Gaia
(0 comments)
- We Can Prevent Traffic Deaths if We Make Safety a Real Priorityby Ryan McGreal, published December 08, 2020 in Special Report: Walkable Streets
(5 comments)
- These Aren't 'Accidents', These Are Resultsby Tom Flood, published December 04, 2020 in Special Report: Walkable Streets
(1 comment)
- Conservation Conundrumby Paul Weinberg, published December 04, 2020 in Special Report
(0 comments)
- Defund Police Protest Threatens Fragile Ruling Classby Cameron Kroetsch, published December 03, 2020 in Special Report: Anti-Racism
(2 comments)
- Measuring the Potential of Biogas to Reduce GHG Emissionsby John Loukidelis and Thomas Cassidy, published November 23, 2020 in Special Report: Climate Change
(0 comments)
- Ontario Squanders Early Pandemic Sacrificeby Ryan McGreal, published November 18, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
Article Archives
Blog Archives
Site Tools
Feeds
By adrian (registered) | Posted October 24, 2011 at 09:39:45 in reply to Comment 70769
Actually, if the speed limit was 30 km/h, most people struck by cars would not die. At 32 km/h, the likelihood that you will be killed by a car is 5%. At 48 km/h it is 45%, at 64 km/h (pretty standard on our main arteries), the likelihood is 85%. So your claim about 30 km/h is patently, scientifically false.
See this article for more details on that.
Secondly, although I appreciate you taking the time to list the fatalities from 2010, cherry-picking one particular year does not prove your point. The most recent fatality was the one I wrote about, a woman who "attempted to cross Fennell". In September, it was a young woman who was killed on Main Street at Main and Walnut. In March, two people died:
"On Friday, March 4, at about 8:30 p.m., a 23-year-old woman crossing Barton Street just east of Normanhurst Avenue was struck by a car. She died early March 5. Her name has not been released.
On Monday, March 7, Travis Savidant, a 15-year-old high school student, died after one of two vehicles involved in a collision at the intersection of East 14th and Howe streets struck him on the sidewalk."
These are all urban locations, and if the cars were traveling substantially slower than they were, I suspect that there would have been fewer fatalities, and probably - based on the statistics I quoted - none.
You're not looking at "data", you're looking at anecdotes. Eleven fatalities in one year do not represent data from which you can extrapolate conclusions. The data - as in, studies based on thousands of incidents - clearly indicate that changes, such as reduced speed limits, do reduce pedestrian fatalities.
Furthermore, the information on cycling that I posted about show that as the rate of cycling increases, overall fatalities decrease - not because of physically separated bike lanes, but because the streets become safer for EVERYONE on them.
Permalink | Context