# let's ban all cars! no. but we SHOULD do SOMEthing. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 19, 2012, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580 "2012-12-19T22:31:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2012, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580/81 "2012-12-22T23:53:43Z")
Of course, if you actually look at the stats ([like this pdf](https://www.aaafoundation.org/sites/default/files/OlderDriverRisk.pdf)) it should make you wonder why we allow people under 25 to operate a motor vehicle, if we’re actually serious about reducing traffic deaths. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2012, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580/82 "2012-12-23T00:17:42Z")
Yes, your cite and my cite agree, teens have the most fatalities by far, and older drivers are so frail they die in crashes more than other adults, even though they have fewer: > [@](#): > > Older people are less likely to survive an injury than younger people. Also from _your_ cite: > [@](#): > > Depending on their ability, older drivers may be limited to driving during daylight hours or on nonfreeway types of roads. … Some 15 states currently require older drivers to take vision tests at license renewal … And from your cite the rate of involvement in accidents per 100,000 drivers, both all and fatal, is _lower_ for those over 75 than for any group 44 and younger. Those over 75 are sometimes frail and may die in an accident that would be just bruising to a younger fitter person but they are safer drivers than most. Do you even read what you link to? You are simply wrong. Teens are by far involved in the most accidents and the most fatalities by any metric so they are regulated the most. Those over 75 are more frail and despite the fact that they are of no greater risk to others on the road or near it than any other group (by any metric) many states put additional requirements on them for their own safety, proving that they have adequate vision and sometimes restricted the where and when they can drive. If _anyone_ develops a medical condition that limits their ability to drive safely most states will restrict their driving. Again, IF ONLY we approached gun issues in the same reasoned fashion. Where does the greatest risk comes from and how can we minimize that risk in the manner in a reasonable way? ---
**Author:** ![Sleeping\_Synapse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7ab992/32.png) [@Sleeping\_Synapse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sleeping_Synapse)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2012, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580/83 "2012-12-23T01:19:28Z")
Rickshaws are a good alternative. It allows for comfortable transportion for the elite, while at that same time keeping the proletariat employed. Win _and_ win. Failing that, treating death caused by callous driving the same way any other form of murder is treated, would be a step in the right direction. ---
**Author:** ![Stoneburg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/df705f/32.png) [@Stoneburg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoneburg)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2012, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580/84 "2012-12-23T02:31:02Z")
> [@Peremensoe](#): > > Practical public transport can exist within cities, even modest-sized ones that in today’s America have nothing. And it can exist _between_ all those cities. > > For a country of our size, technology, and affluence, we _should_ have an environment in which anyone living in a city of 100,000 or more is within foot, bicycle, or trolley range of an intercity rail station where they can get passage to any other city of size. > > There’s _so much_ progress that could be made on those fronts that, for the foreseeable future, saying we can’t ultimately have bus or rail lines to _every_ rural hamlet, while true, mainly functions as a distraction from the substance of the issues. Yes I am very much in agreement that there is room for much more public transport in existing cities. My claim is merely that in order to make economical and enviromental sense, things such as buses, subways, trams etc need a density of population that is only found in cities. A city with a population of 100.000 can be extremely different. Ranging from impossible to supply with public transportation because of low density, to not needing it other than for external transport due to high density. 100.000 people can comfortable live within an area smaller than a square mile\*, and is enough to sustain even advanced functions such as hospitals. With good planning, you’d never have to travel more than half a mile. Which would be a 10 minute walk. So really any form of motorised transportation would be pretty unneccesary in most situations, and you could probably get by with just a couple of rental cars or taxis for when you really need one. Mass transportation would only be needed for travel to other cities. - The current record is “Mong Kok” in Hong Kong, with 340k per square mile. The central district of Eixample in Barcelona has around 300k people living within a 3 square mile area, and is very attractive form what I have heard. Manhattan has around 70k per square mile, which is respectable. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2012, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580/85 "2012-12-23T05:22:18Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > They could probably do that now, but I’m not sure how you could ensure the police would get there in time. I would add a metal detector and an airlock, so they couldn’t get in unless someone buzzed them in, if they aren’t on the authorized list. It’s probably still cheaper than a full-time security guard. I had a computer room I worked in during the 70s. It just had an atrium and a window, so the operators could verify you and buzz you in through the second set of doors. I’d also add secure fencing so no one could get in through the playground. And the grounds should be patrolled by robot German Shepherds with laser beams shooting from their eyes. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2012, 5:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580/86 "2012-12-23T05:58:19Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > I think you are probably right. I would guess that also by then, schools will have sophisticated intruder detection systems with cameras and computers with facial recognition software. If somebody who doesn’t belong even comes close to entering the school, the school administrators will be notified immediately and the doors will lock him out. Must do better than that, I think. If I read correctly, the Newtown shooter busted his way into the school. I guess we need to make schools into titanium fortresses to deal with these extremely rare events, because we seem to be unable or unwilling to address what drives people to rampaging. > [@emacknight](#): > > Of course, if you actually look at the stats ([like this pdf](https://www.aaafoundation.org/sites/default/files/OlderDriverRisk.pdf)) it should make you wonder why we allow people under 25 to operate a motor vehicle, if we’re actually serious about reducing traffic deaths. Giving teenagers drivers licenses helps acclimate them to the automobile in the first place. Start them young and they will come to repeat clichés about how crucial the car is to our survival, because it is all they have ever known. > [@Stoneburg](#): > > 100.000 people can comfortable live within an area smaller than a square mile\*, and is enough to sustain even advanced functions such as hospitals. With good planning, you’d never have to travel more than half a mile. Which would be a 10 minute walk. Just by dint of spending more time vertical (walking), [city dwellers may be healthier than suburbanites](http://www.ceosforcities.org/blog/entry/2535). If mass transit in the form of something like dial-a-ride could be effectively combined with fleet rental service, the need for personally-owned automobiles might be nearly eliminated even in the (redesigned) suburbs. Beyond that, rural areas could be served by order/delivery routes, making grocery shopping a non-travel event. The solutions are there, they just tend to be to economical for the economy to support them. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2012, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580/87 "2012-12-23T13:40:16Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > They could probably do that now, I don’t think facial recognition software has reached that point yet. > [@](#): > > but I’m not sure how you could ensure the police would get there in time. Well the doors would lock before the intruder got into the building. That would ordinarily give school administration (and the authorities) plenty of time to assess and deal with the situation. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2012, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580/88 "2012-12-23T13:45:46Z")
> [@For You](#): > > Must do better than that, I think. If I read correctly, the Newtown shooter busted his way into the school. I guess we need to make schools into titanium fortresses I think a titanium fortress is overkill. Good solid doors and locks ought to keep most people out for at least long enough for the authorities to come. > [@](#): > > , because we seem to be unable or unwilling to address what drives people to rampaging. It seems these events are rare enough that they are difficult to predict. How many men between the ages of 18 and 40 were under psychological treatment in America in the past couple months? Probably tens of thousands. If you gave all of their files to the best team of psychologists in the country, could they have predicted with any accuracy who would go on a shooting spree? Maybe they could have narrowed it down to a few thousand. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2012, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580/89 "2012-12-23T14:01:11Z")
> [@casdave](#): > > What is the primary purpose of a gun? Well, MY primary purpose is to protect myself. That doesn’t mean it’s the same as anyone else’s primary purpose, and therein lies the problem. ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2012, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580/90 "2012-12-23T15:49:27Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > I don’t think facial recognition software has reached that point yet. The general facial recognition problem it probably too difficult, but we only need to recognize the students, faculty and staff. That seems doable. I’m not sure if want to use facial recognition of the students in the morning. It would probably cause a traffic Jam. We might have someone actually man the door in the morning. We would just use the facial system after school starts. If you don’t like facial recognition, then we could use thumbprints or some other system. > [@](#): > > Well the doors would lock before the intruder got into the building. That would ordinarily give school administration (and the authorities) plenty of time to assess and deal with the situation. Actually the doors would already be locked. They wouldn’t unlock until the system recognized them or someone buzzed them it. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2012, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580/91 "2012-12-23T15:59:42Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Do you even read what you link to? You are simply wrong. Teens are by far involved in the most accidents and the most fatalities by any metric so they are regulated the most. Again, you are missing the point. Teens are the ONLY ones regulated, which should raise two questions: why are they allowed to drive in the first place, and why aren’t similar regulations applied proportionately? Only two states require seniors to get retested. What strikes me about elderly driving is that it seems to end catastrophically, in that they don’t know when to intervene until it’s too late and 10 people are dead. It takes a lot to get a senior to stop driving, and you’ll see exactly the same answers as gun-right-activists give. > [@DSeid](#): > > Again, IF ONLY we approached gun issues in the same reasoned fashion. Where does the greatest risk comes from and how can we minimize that risk in the manner in a reasonable way? We do approach the two issues in the same fashion but I’d hardly call it reasoned. Right now we’re dealing with a mass shooting, so people are responding with hysteria. Twenty children could have just as easily been killed by a senior, a drunk, or a texter, and that would have resulted in a nearly identical public response. If it had been a senior we’d have calls to ban seniors from driving, followed by the AARP or some other lobby group reminding us that driving is a right, and that seniors need cars, and that even though 20 children just died the stats don’t reflect an increased risk. Just look at all the seniors that are good drivers, why judge based on this one case. If it had been a drunk MADD would have had a field day, with calls to further tighten whatever regulation they can get their hands on. Lower blood alcohol levels, more police check points, stiffer penalties, ignition interrupts. Texting is the one that cracks me up because it has more to do with distracted driving, but we’re not willing to go after the root cause, only the low hanging fruit. Texting is something teens do and it’s easy to go after a group that can’t vote and has no lobby group. [QUOTE=DSeid] Deaths from car accidents have been taken seriously and no one seriously objects to regulations aimed at reducing traffic deaths. [/quote] You are very, very wrong about that. We do not take car deaths seriously, and drivers freak out in exactly the same when we you try to take away their cars. Driving is ingrained in our society, people need cars to function, taking their car means taking away their freedom. We are far from willing to actually regulate driving the way we regulate guns, at least until we see cars limited in the speed they can travel (do you really need to go faster than 55mph) or banned because they _look_ fast. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2012, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580/92 "2012-12-23T16:19:39Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > Again, you are missing the point. Teens are the ONLY ones regulated… And again you are out and out WRONG. We are ALL regulated. teens most, the elderly next most (despite their \*lack \*of increased risk to anyone other than themselves, which is as true for them as passengers as drivers), then the rest. Repeating an untrue statement does not make it any more true. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2012, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580/93 "2012-12-23T16:32:05Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > The general facial recognition problem it probably too difficult, but we only need to recognize the students, faculty and staff. That seems doable. > > I’m not sure if want to use facial recognition of the students in the morning. It would probably cause a traffic Jam. We might have someone actually man the door in the morning. We would just use the facial system after school starts. Well I’m talking about facial recognition which is just as quick and effective as an excellent doorman. I don’t think we are there yet and you seem to agree with me. ---
**Author:** ![Kazo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbce88/32.png) [@Kazo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kazo)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2012, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580/94 "2012-12-23T17:05:39Z")
I can’t believe nobody has mentioned this. Want to get ban happy for the sake of safety, without outright banning motor vehicles? **SUVs**. They’re overweight, they are too tall to be compatible with smaller vehicles’ impact protection (door bars, bumpers, etc), they are top heavy and tend to roll, they don’t have the same structural standards as the trucks they are based on, and _they serve no purpose that other safer vehicles do just as well_. Carrying lots of people? Minivan. Lots of cargo but need it covered? Pickup truck. Want a luxurious ride? Lexus/Cadillac/etc. Going offroad? Jeep Wrangler. There is no reason for an SUV to be driven by a single occupant. Want a nice commuter car strictly fir oneself? Buy a Miata! ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2012, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580/95 "2012-12-23T17:11:34Z")
My sister bought a Lexus SUV some years back, and the salesman said, “I hope you don’t plan to ever drive this on anything other than a paved road. This is not a vehicle for sport driving. It’s a passenger vehicle with a large cargo capacity.” She appreciated the honesty – many car sales people would claim their cars could do pretty much anything. ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2012, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580/96 "2012-12-23T22:20:25Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Well I’m talking about facial recognition which is just as quick and effective as an excellent doorman. I don’t think we are there yet and you seem to agree with me. What I’m talking about is a database of the people at a given school which is workable problem. If you talking about a database of millions of people, then we aren’t there yet. As near as I can tell, the average grammar school only has a few hundred students. I don’t know how many has over 1,000. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2012, 9:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580/97 "2012-12-24T09:50:29Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > What I’m talking about is a database of the people at a given school which is workable problem. If you talking about a database of millions of people, then we aren’t there yet. > > As near as I can tell, the average grammar school only has a few hundred students. I don’t know how many has over 1,000. I don’t understand your point. Here’s what you said before: > [@](#): > > I’m not sure if want to use facial recognition of the students in the morning. It would probably cause a traffic Jam. We might have someone actually man the door in the morning. You seem to concede that at the moment, a doorman would do a quicker and more effective job at facial recognition than a computer. ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2012, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580/98 "2012-12-24T14:19:19Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > I don’t understand your point. Here’s what you said before: > > You seem to concede that at the moment, a doorman would do a quicker and more effective job at facial recognition than a computer. Having full time armed security is expensive. Having someone from the staff stand by the door in the morning is cheap, because you are just using someone already on the staff. The point is having it set up so someone just can’t walk in and start shooting students. A facial recognition system should work for other times of day and be cheap. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2012, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580/99 "2012-12-24T14:38:52Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > Having full time armed security is expensive. Having someone from the staff stand by the door in the morning is cheap, because you are just using someone already on the staff. The point is having it set up so someone just can’t walk in and start shooting students. A facial recognition system should work for other times of day and be cheap. I still don’t understand your point. Do you agree that at the moment, facial recognition software would not be as quick and effective as a doorman? ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2012, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580/100 "2012-12-24T17:23:37Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > I still don’t understand your point. Do you agree that at the moment, facial recognition software would not be as quick and effective as a doorman? What I’m saying is that any system is problematic when hundreds of people are trying to get into the building at the same time. When I went on jury duty, it slowed down a lot just getting people through the metal detectors. In the mornings, it might be easier to have someone watch and keep out the obvious non-children. If you are okay with 6 people per minute, then you can run the face detectors all the time. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-ban-all-cars-no-but-we-should-do-something/644580.md?page=6)