• Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Vehicles with higher, more vertical front ends pose greater risk to pedestrians

    I think that’s more accurate. Vehicles big, small, tall, short, electric, or gas powered… makes no difference. There’s no greater risk to pedestrians than multi-ton moving vehicles.

    • Evkob@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      I get where you’re coming from, but without context your point comes across as more of a “all cars are dangerous therefore we shouldn’t bother regulating oversized SUVs” rather than the “Yes SUVs are particularly dangerous but let’s keep in mind that all cars are dangerous” that you were aiming for.

      • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        “all cars are dangerous therefore we shouldn’t bother regulating oversized SUVs” rather than the “Yes SUVs are particularly dangerous but let’s keep in mind that all cars are dangerous” that you were aiming for.

        Oh, geeze. Yeah, I really didn’t intend for it to sound like the first part. I 1000% believe that larger vehicles NEED to be regulated, like yesterday.

      • Overzeetop@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        That’s actually surprising. I would think damage to lower extremities (delicate knee joints) would be far more severe from a concentrated impact area than a large area impact distributed over the entire body - when it occurs with a low speed impact.

        • biddy@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          There’s nuances here, but in principle you are incorrect. A car can be assumed to be infinitely heavier than a pedestrian. That means that every part of their body that’s in contact with the car will be accelerated to car speed. So it’s not that with a larger area the force is spread out, there’s actually just more places that have force applied. In other words, a low car will break your legs, a high car will break your legs and torso.

    • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      A train fits that statement too. So do planes. And boats.

      Big thing move fast hurt when hit. Thats not whats being discussed, tho, cause we all inherently understand physics.

      • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        A train fits that statement too. So do planes. And boats.

        Trains run on tracks, and you can’t get hit by one unless you put yourself on those tracks.

        I’m not aware of pedestrians and cyclists getting hit by planes. I’d be interested to hear about this trend.

        Boats aren’t typically found on city streets, and pedestrian fatalities involving boats is how common?

        City and suburban streets should have fewer cars on it, not more. These are pedestrian areas, and perhaps we can learn a thing or two about how to actually prevent pedestrian fatalities by looking at European city planning and design.

  • vivadanang@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Gonna be great seeing Cybertrucks mow through pedestrians with their ridiculous blind spots and sharp stainless steel corners all over.

    Honestly the thing is starting to remind me of the homer car, what a fucking joke

    • BossDj@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Ohhhh So the title of the article was directed towards pedestrians, not car murder enthusiasts