According to the Business Insider these cities have the worst drivers of US cities over 100,000 in population for 2010
[ol]
[li]Washington, DC (95.5%)[/li][li]Baltimore, MD (79.4%)[/li][li]Glendale, CA (70.8%)[/li][li]Newark, NJ (62.9%)[/li][li]Hartford, CT (59.4%)[/li][li]Providence, RI (54.8%)[/li][li]Philadelphia, PA (53.5%)[/li][li]Jersey City, NJ (50.2%)[/li][li]San Francisco, CA (49.1%)[/li][li]Elizabeth, NJ (45.2%)[/li][li]Los Angeles, CA (44.7%)[/li][li]Jackson, MS (44.7%)[/li][li]Garland, TX (43.6%)[/li][li]Hialeah, FL (39.3%)[/li][li]New Haven, CT (38.9%)[/li][li]Paterson, NJ (38.6%)[/li][/ol]
City - State (Crash Rate ABOVE national average)
So what do you think? In your opinion what cities do YOU think have the worst drivers?
I have lived in DC and I agree totally. I HATED driving in DC. Everyone was nuts with their driving.
People in other nations than the USA feel free to post your idea of the cities in your country with the worst drivers.
Are those rates supposed to be “in excess of average”? So that DC drivers crash 95.5% more often - nearly twice as much - as the average US driver? Wow.
But, how is “crash” defined? Any incident reported to the police? Insurance claims?
(I suspect a high incidence of insurance fraud in those stats…)
Correct, that mean the DC crash rate is nearly twice that of the national average. I believe it. I lived in DC and it’s horrible driving there. Plus they have those darn traffic circles that no one can figure out. It’s really easy to understand why it’s so high there, if you’ve ever driven there.
There are probably a lot more foreign drivers in DC as well, not understanding how traffic in the USA works. And there is a ton of in and out traffic from MD and VA and DC is very small and dense, like San Francisco (also on the list) is.
This also only covers reported crashes from local police statistics. It is defined according to the article as reported to the police.
Boston drivers are very good. It’s the outsiders who don’t know how to drive at our elevated level that cause problems. That, and our belief that turn signals are simply giving aid and comfort the enemy.
I just got back from Bangalore India and I can safely say that driving there is a whole 'nuther level from anything in the States or Europe. I’ve been in Bangkok, Kathmandu, and a few other cities in SE Asia and the Bangalore traffic leaves them all in the dust. But, in the week I was there I only saw one accident. The drivers are completely insane, but they are all equally insane and somehow it all works out.
Actually I just looked up the sizes of these cities in square miles. Except for LA, Philly and Jackson, they all are pretty small and would be dense. I wonder if that contributes to a higher crash rate?
[ol]
[li]Washington, DC (68 sq mi)[/li][li]Baltimore, MD (80 sq mi)[/li][li]Glendale, CA (30 sq mi)[/li][li]Newark, NJ (26 sq mi)[/li][li]Hartford, CT (18 sq mi)[/li][li]Providence, RI (18 sq mi)[/li][li]Philadelphia, PA (135 sq mi)[/li][li]Jersey City, NJ (15 sq mi)[/li][li]San Francisco, CA (47 sq mi)[/li][li]Elizabeth, NJ (14 sq mi)[/li][li]Los Angeles, CA (469 sq mi)[/li][li]Jackson, MS (140 sq mi)[/li][li]Garland, TX (57 sq mi)[/li][li]Hialeah, FL (19 sq mi)[/li][li]New Haven, CT (19 sq mi)[/li][li]Paterson, NJ (9 sq mi)[/li][/ol]
To be fair, I’m guessing that a major part of the reason DC and Baltimore are so high up there is the Capital Beltway is a virtually unavoidable portion of I-95, so we get blamed for all of the fucked up drivers getting into accidents while just passing through on their way up/down the coast.
Not to mention a large portion of the population in the area is transient, coming and going with each election cycle, so there is a constant influx of people who are wholly unfamiliar with the area.
Having grown up in LA, I’m always one to defend LA drivers. Fast and tailgate too much, well yeah, but surprisingly competent. Now, I think the shittiest drivers are the ones in the rural areas BETWEEN San Francisco and LA on the 101. 50mph in the fast lane? Yup.
But by far the worst drivers I’ve experienced are in the state of Florida. They’ve got every type of shit driver. Recent immigrants from third world nations with no knowledge of traffic laws? Fast and furious ricer retards driving at insane speeds to pass you then arbitrarily slowing down to 55 in the fast lane once they pass you? Blind old farts driving behemoth cars either way too fast or way to slow? Low riders driving way too slow? People driving 90mph during torrential downpours? All there, plus horrific traffic.
The above List does not have even one Massachusetts town listed. Therefore the list if faulty and must be redone.
The term, Masshole, came from somewhere, and wasn’t just pulled from the ether. In my experience, MA drivers are the worse; driving in the breakdown lane, in the shoulder, between cars, at excess speed, swerving, honking, flipping the bird etc…
I love all the MA dopers, and I know [think] **CalMeacham ** can attest to their driving habits - even though he is a good driver.
Boston was the one I immediately looked for and didn’t see when I looked at the list. There is something wrong with it’s title at least if Boston isn’t in the top 2. I live in the greater Boston area and there are some flat-out strange driving customs and laws plus the roads just randomly branch off with little to no signage. You used driving in the breakdown lane as an example of bad driving in Boston. Did you know that is actually legal on some major roads during rush hour? You won’t see signs for it but it is because somebody thought it was a swell idea. That’s right, put fast moving traffic right where they least expect it. They will never see it coming!!!
I was scared to rent a car and be the sole driver on a trip to Northern California, but it actually was a pleasant driving experience.
There was always a ton of traffic but people were very good about letting you change lanes. VERY good, even better than here in the polite Midwest. You just put on your blinker and a spot opens up.
I didn’t do too much driving in San Francisco proper, though. Just from the airport to Mountain View, a trip from MV to downtown SF to a parking lot, and then from MV back to the airport.
Well no…I did drive around the city for a bit, chauffeuring a friend between hostels. It wasn’t that bad.
I see I’m not the only one puzzled by the absence of Boston on the list. I lived there for several years and driving was…traumatic. A combination of a**hole drivers, bad roads and a complete lack of rhyme or reason to the layout (not surprising considering most of the routes date back at least 300 years, long before urban planning was thought of). I’ve driven in most of the West Coast cities and they aren’t even in the same league. Seattle and Portland are a relative breeze, San Fran is confusing but not so bad if you keep your wits about you. Even LA, which has a bad rep isn’t all that bad - people drive fast & aggressively but it’s predictable, and traffic actually flows pretty smoothly most of the time.
SS
I’ll add my voice to the “What kind of bad drivers list excludes Boston” chorus. I have driven in almost every major metro area in the United States and Canada and Boston stands out from all of them as a terrible place to drive.
I think this list is only for states where Allstate offers coverage - I’ll bet they don’t insure Massachusetts drivrs at all. Thanks to JoelUpChurch’s link, it’s pretty clear that the list does not include all of the Top X most populous cities in the US.
I dunno about cities, but the three stretches of interstate I most dread are the ones between Tucson and Phoenix, Portland and Seattle and I-10 through L.A…
Of course I haven’t had to drive any part of I-95 in years, so that probably invalidates the above.
Pittsburgh is both the best and the worst. The best because if you can drive there you can drive anywhere. The worst because even the most experienced, lived-in-Pittsburgh-for-50-years driver turns into a sniveling coward when they get anywhere near a tunnel, which backs traffic up for miles around.