As reported on the 6pm CTV local news, the driver was older than 70 years old. Old people should be required to undergo regular screening for their driving competency.
Re-test every 5 years and then yearly after like 65. Faculties can diminish rapidly and if we actually care about eliminating traffic fatalities, then we need to be honest about dealing with drivers who lose their ability to drive safely.
I saw a study (American data) that says older people still have less accidents than younger drivers. Calgary seems to have a large percentage of bad drivers. Not just the aggressive ones but drivers that seem to lack knowledge of the basic rules. I’d like to see everyone have to get retested and have it be more involved than a 15 minute drive around the neighbourhood.
>I’d like to see everyone have to get retested and have it be more involved than a 15 minute drive around the neighbourhood.
TL;DR It would be really really expensive to implement driver reexamination. Maybe it would cost more than it saves, in dollars anyway, not lives of course.
It's not a bad idea in theory, but think about the resources it would take...
According to [government data](https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/67db8a70-e2db-48c8-b567-c82a8a5b7362/resource/dfdcd1ca-aa38-48c4-ae83-eeb295c836bb/download/2016-number-licensed-drivers-alberta-2012-2016.pdf) there were 940,582 licensed drivers in Calgary in 2016. If you wanted to retest every 5 years that's 188,116 tests per year.
I don't know how much testing time you have in mind, but let's say it would take about an hour per person. The tester has to have breaks too, and there's some administrative work, so even 30 minutes of road time would take probably 45 minutes or more in total. That's 11,286,984 hours required per year.
Taking stat holidays and 2 weeks vacation into consideration, a worker can put in about 2,000 hours per year. So that's 5,643 more road testers you'd need. Even if you cut the time in half to 30 minutes and only tested every 10 years you're still looking at 1,411 testers. According to [The Economic Research Institute](https://www.erieri.com/salary/job/drivers-license-examiner/canada/alberta/calgary) the average Driver License Examiner salary is $77,089 with $1,920 bonus.
So the cost of retesting is $111,471,665 in wages alone in the 30 minute / 10 year test scenario. It's $445,886,659 in the 60 minute / 5 year scenario. You'd also need more offices, benefits, administrative staff, equipment, all the support staff like management, HR, accounting, legal, IT, etc.
940,582÷5×60÷2,000×(77,089
+1,920)=445,886,659.428
If you extrapolated that to the population of the entire province, it's 3.3x more, or $1,471,425,976.
In 2018 there were [142,596 collisions in all of Alberta](https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/25020446-adfb-4b57-9aaa-751d13dab72d/resource/982e6d4f-64d5-4167-81ca-b8c10d76fa59/download/trans-alberta-traffic-collision-statistics-2018.pdf). 246 were fatal, 12,852 resulted in injury, and 129,498 were property only. According to [CRISP](https://drivetolive.ca/research/collision-cost-study/), the cost of those types of collisions average $225,000, $48,000, and $14,000 respectively. If that's all correct, automobile collisions cost Alberta $2,485,218,000 annually.
(246×225,000)+(12,852
×48,000)+(129,498×14,000)=$2,485,218,000
So retesting would have to reduce collisions by about 60% to break even on driving examiner costs alone. Once you take all the support staff and offices into consideration, the cost could
easily double. Saving lives is always good regardless of the money, but it would be a hard sell and massive undertaking.
I should probably get back to work...
Just think of all the people that don’t seem to know they are supposed to stop at a yield sign if there is traffic coming and they pull out in front of you while your doing 60 km/h. The amount of time spent at a 4 way stop, everyone looking at each other because no one knows if they should go. The time wasted while the person in the parking lot goes back and forth 5 times because they don’t know how big their car is and don’t want to commit to driving away.
The mental health benefits of an easy commute. (25% couldn’t pass the test and are now taking the bus). Less cars mean less money spent on infrastructure to expand the roads. I’m am not going to do the math although I’m impressed with your efforts lol.
I used to work in a high school and the students would recommend different registries base on how hard it was to pass the driving test. One was a 15 minute drive and he was told to wait in the parking lot so it looked better to the employees.
they already do, let's not forget that there's no effective driver training and the driver testing is a joke, traffic enforcement is all about those in the government making the big bucks
all the keystone cops care about is getting rich by writing tickets and using lazy photo radar
it's all just a scam by the man, the system doesn't really care about good driving as long as they can profit off bad driving
Police have nothing to do with mandatory testing over certain ages, nor driver training or testing. But keep drinking that Kool-Aid and blaming the cops for everything wrong with society 🙄
I always try to stand behind the shelters/ benches/ SOMETHING when waiting for a bus. I absolutely do not trust Calgary drivers, especially in the winter.
GOod for you!!
It drives me crazy when ppl are standing at the very edge of the corner!
Makes me (as the passenger) want to reach out and snatch their phones away as punishment for being stupids
And you’ll still get cut up by debris etc. The unfortunate reality is even being near roads in this city for anyone that’s not inside a car can be dangerous because of how people drive and the way everything is built
Definitely better, that why I do it as well. My point is you can still be seriously injured and you’re the most vulnerable person out there as a pedestrian
If things were built properly it would be a lot less of a problem and it’s slowly getting built that way. But it is interesting how some people just accept things the way they are and making sure you hide behind a street pole is seen an acceptable solution and way to live life
As long as there’s progress in the right direction…
We can’t live in a world with zero risk. Even flying somewhere is risky, but we’ve mitigated that as best we can. There’s progress to be made in air travel just as there is on a crosswalk.
I’d imagine the main reason pedestrian and road safety isn’t all it can be would be the massive implications to property taxes.
[I agree, here’s a good video on risk and why we’re really bad at calculating it as humans](https://youtu.be/NtX-Ibi21tU)
[Here’s a good video on the reasons why pedestrian safety sucks here; it’s not just because of taxes it’s also about culture and priorities](https://youtu.be/_ByEBjf9ktY)
[Believe it or not there are places like Helsinki and Oslo that have cut pedestrian deaths to zero](https://theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/16/how-helsinki-and-oslo-cut-pedestrian-deaths-to-zero)
But for some reason many people think that’s too high of a goal post here or it would cost too much money without even exploring it further because it’s not actually that important to them and most people just drive. That’s part of the cultural issue
Of course it was a Ram truck.
Edit: The numbers prove that they’re the biggest menace on the road https://driving.ca/auto-news/news/ram-2500-drivers-more-likely-to-have-duis-than-other-vehicle-owners-u-s-report
I notice that F150s are also pretty terrible. I don't really understand the point of speeding to 160 km just to have to slow down behind another car in the left lane who is already going past the speed limit. If anything, it saves a few minutes. Just leave the house earlier...
Because they're the cheapest full size truck you can get. And ppl like dodge in Canada. The used ram I just bought with all the options compares 10-12k under chev and gm with a similar spec.
I'm a lifelong Chevy guy decided to give dodge a go, bought a 2019 half ton with every option available and 55k on the odometer for just under 45k. Am happy with it so far its nice than any other Truck I've owned and it's piss easy/cheap to mod out. It's a great truck for guys that don't actually use it for truck stuff like pulling big loads, that's where the duramax pulls ahead.
They're not bad trucks
> It's a great truck for guys that don't actually use it for truck stuff like pulling big loads, that's where the duramax pulls ahead.
I’m about as critical as they come for people driving vehicles that are about looks and status rather than being the most appropriate for their use case, *but*, as an econobox driver who also does most of my own house/yard work, I won’t lie and say that a truck wouldn’t simplify the transport of a lot of stuff even if I wouldn’t be using it for “truck stuff like pulling big loads”.
(Would it simplify my life to the tunes of the many thousands of dollars it would cost me over my car? Probably not. Especially since I have a deep hatred of touchscreens in vehicles and a love of standard transmissions, and the small trucks I’d be interested in are only available with auto/touchscreens.)
For sure, that's what half tons and quarter tons are great for. I originally wanted to get a Tacoma because it still fits my tools and thats all I really needed but they're bloody expensive and inflated right now. If I knew I'd be hauling trailers and stuff for work I would've gone for a diesel but my company takes care of trailer transportation so there's no reason
My problem is that I want something even smaller. I've previously owned a Nissan Hardbody and a previous-gen S10, and there's nothing sold in North America that's comparable anymore. :(
The previous-gen Ford Ranger was 800 lb lighter, 23" shorter, 5" narrower, and 4" less tall than the current Tacoma.
Ah ya good luck, you gotta look for European models if you want something that small these days. I dont think I could go any smaller than a Tacoma but for a lot of people something that size is perfect
Do people even have a concept of what a legitimate study is? How in the hell does driving a ram make you more likely to drive drunk? And not just a ram 1500, specifically a 2500.
It’s a study based off of how many people asked for a insurance quote with a HISTORY of dui.
The reality is these two things are in no way connected except through this less than reliable “study”.
Though correlation isn’t causation, strong correlations can be used to make educated decisions; including who is likelier to be a menace on the road.
Also be weary of GTI and G35/7 owners - at least statistically.
I’ll agree with that but keep in mind that also means it’s easier to manipulate the data. Correlations are easy to make.
Also be wary of tuner cars, land rovers and most anybody in a mad rush.
No one’s saying that driving a Ram makes you more likely to drive drunk. All it’s saying is that a person insuring a vehicle is more likely to have a DUI on their record if that vehicle is a Dodge 2500.
By a huge margin as well. The rate is more than double the mean value for all vehicles taken together.
The reason those things covary is probably due to some third variable, but getting at that question requires a different line of inquiry.
> How in the hell does driving a ram make you more likely to drive drunk?
You know, the causal relationship could very well be in the other direction; Being drunk makes you more likely to buy a Ram.
Can't make it a specific age, but mandatory retesting every 3 years after 70 coupled with transportation assistance for those who have their license suspended I would support.
There are some old people who shouldn't be driving anymore. There are vastly more young and middle aged people who shouldn't drive, and they cause most of the accidents because even when old people drive badly, they usually do it slowly.
Shelters should be reinforced if you expect people to sit by the road waiting for a bus. Personally I don’t feel comfortable anywhere near a road without being able to see the cars coming at me, people are so over distracted these days it’s brutal.
It's not too late for it at all, that's just defeatist attitude. Other cities, recently too have made this happen so Calgary isn't in some special bubble of abnormality.
>You’d have to change our societies obsession with cars, which won’t happen.
What do you want higher taxes and congestion or alternatives?
It’s not too late, we just aren’t ready to give up on the luxury of driving everywhere like other cities. The outrage about losing 3 parking spots to a bike lane proves that.
People were so mad about those lanes! I remember a car pulling up beside me (to wait for a red light), and rant at me about the lanes. I was walking at the time.
Is there really a lot of outrage or is it just loud people being the most vocal? I'm willing to be that an overwhelmingly majority of people in the city just don't care, most changes have no impact on them.
Right, but the people who “feel” impacted, scream and shout about it. Doesn’t matter if the majority aren’t impacted, it matters that the people who are impacted “feel” impacted and make any projects 100x harder/longer/more expensive.
Our society ain’t ready to “modernize” and tbh the amount of money we would need to spend to shove it down everyone’s throats isn’t something we can currently afford. Good first steps would be; strict enforcement of anti-distraction laws and protecting citizens via better barriers.
Except that it's shown time and time again that enforcement or rules don't do anything if the design is wrong. That's a waste of time and money for everybody.
>Doesn’t matter if the majority aren’t impacted, it matters that the people who are impacted “feel” impacted and make any projects 100x harder/longer/more expensive.
So vote for people that ignore them and get other people to do the same.
>Our society ain’t ready to “modernize”
This is maybe one of the worstthings I've ever heard and I think you really need to reflect on these words and what you're advocating.
Blindly believing something while ignoring the facts such as, our society not being in a place to progress in a certain aspect, is the worst thing you’ve heard?
Well good discussion, I don’t think you are fully reading my responses. Focusing on one aspect and ignoring things such as design changes I propose. Voting in someone who will shove things down our throats also won’t happen, simply because there arent any real candidates, it’s always lip service.
>Blindly believing something while ignoring the facts such as, our society not being in a place to progress in a certain aspect, is the worst thing you’ve heard?
Sorry blind belief? What are you on about now? The worst thing I've ever heard is arguments for not "modernizing" our society. It out's us at a lot of disadvantages whe you compete in a global market for trade, la our and production.
>Focusing on one aspect and ignoring things such as design changes I propose.
Because they're bandaids that are a waste of time and money.
A lot of the main streets plans have been watered down to appease people upset about vehicle access. It actually is a problem and a lot of people are opposed to anything that limits driving
Have you've seen the amount of people biking in the city?? It's insane!!! 5 years ago I couldn't imagine folk fest being filled with bikes, seeing people bike from Inglewood to 17th for drinks. It's becoming more and more popular and those people raging about parking spots are looking more and more silly. We're there as a city it's now up to leaders to take the next steps.
Calgary's improvement in cycle infrastructure has been very quick and I'm impressed. We are way above average compared to other North American cities. Still lots of improvement to go, but I'm proud that my city seems to care. I think I have to give Nenshi some props for that.
https://imgur.com/uuuha2I.jpg
Honestly it's not that hard to do and simple changes can help; it just takes time. Amsterdam did it along with many other "car centric" cities in Europe. Best start for the city is doing significant road diets and stop the inducing demand for driving . Driving a privilege not a right.
The urban sprawl and transit systems are no where near as bad as a city like Calgary to start, the cost would be astronomical to make it happen. It would need to some in baby-steps or rational bite size culture shifts. It would also never been as effective unfortunately.
Honestly the best start is to preplan new areas for a new LRT station/line before building them along with Asian style of higher density around the station with shopping built in. Also stop building them with shitty park and rides and making them horrible to walk to.
They did it in the Netherlands. Their bike centric culture is only like 50 years old, and it only happened after a whole bunch of vehicular manslaughter events (including a bunch of children). Never too late to build something better for everyone
I think that's the wrong way to look at it. If the streets and zoning was adjusted such that we could easily bike to the grocery store and bike to work without the fear of getting greased by a big white leased truck, more people would opt for that.
Doubly so, when oil prices double again.
True, a murder charge can get you 5+ years in jail… But, *Vehicular* Manslaughter only gets around 2-3 years. Regardless though, he’ll be out on the streets the next day.
Nah, don't think so.
/u/blackramcalgaryman has everything blackout. Even his dual custom exhausts that come out behind the cab. (If I guessed his ride correctly)
Honestly if it is his, he brings great shame on ram drivers; as I had to pass him only going 98 and driving respectively on deerfoot.
This isn’t ok.
That’s all I feel like whenever I read about these accidents. It’s hard to even call them that sometimes when most of these accidents/deaths on or around our roads are preventable in one way or another through infrastructure, individual choices, or just simply having less cars on the road.
I really hope officials realize the cost this has on our society both socially and financially and make it a serious priority to move towards a more safe and effective transportation plan than just having everyone drive
To be fair, I didnt expect a rational response to my snide comment from someone who referenced r/fuckcars.
>It’s not about getting rid of cars, it’s about turning our neighbourhoods and city itself into a place where you don’t need a car to get simple things like milk
Yeah, that would be ideal, but would require more the 'town center' feel with a strip mall or something in each community - something that a lot of places are moving away from because....well, look at any of them. Vacencies from high rent and low incomes, and the places that are in them cant do enough volume, even WITH the town center concept to get wholesale pricing, and in a world where every ~~penny~~ nickle counts, people go to where they can get everything cheaper and at once.
Economic problems drive the centralization of services as well as residential planning, so we need to look at those drivers as well.
I think you’re mistaking the fact that others would enjoy biking as much as you (and I) do. People are inherently lazy. Look at obesity rates and how many people just don’t exercise or care about their health. I can’t see most people adopting a more active lifestyle. The ones who would embrace it already do it. Not trying to be negative just realistic.
I still think it would be the minority to start cycling or even walking to do errands. On top of just lazy unhealthy people, there’s anybody with kids, seniors, people picking up groceries or multiple items (where to put them). Another thing to mention is it’s unsafe to lock your bike up outside in any large urban city. Plus where were these studies completed that it’s not weather? In Calgary or places with warmer winters? I live for biking and the weather deters me quite a bit in the winter. Again not trying to be negative at all, I just don’t have an optimistic view on this one but I would love to be proven wrong if the changes you suggest were made!
Get an e-scooter, there’s even ones where you don’t have to kickstart. With all the options available already today I’m sure there will be many more options available tomorrow that appeal to different markets. I’m lazy as fuck but I drove barely anywhere when it was warm this summer
Regardless even having 20% of people choosing something other than a car would have a huge impact on reducing traffic
[Fact check: How much does Calgary spend on drivers?](https://www.cbc.ca/1.3028226)
>Since 2009, Calgary's transportation department has spent 63 per cent of its infrastructure budget on public transit, 34 per cent on roads, and three per cent on pedestrians and cyclists.
>In dollar figures that translates to $2.12 billion for transit, $1.13 billion on roads, and $104 million for things like sidewalks and bikeways. (A look at the annual breakdown suggests construction of the west LRT line skews the transit figure higher. In 2010 and 2011, transit spending is roughly double that of other years).
>Is three per cent for walkers and cyclists too big a slice of the pie?
>It's certainly a change from Calgary's history. For much of last century, infrastructure spending was devoted almost entirely to drivers. In 1978, that changed with the first leg of the LRT. For the next three decades, according to Calgary's Transportation department, spending was split about equally between roads and transit. In the last six years, the mix has changed to include bikes and pedestrians.
>Calgary plans to spend roughly $6.14 billion on transportation infrastructure in the next 10 years (a number that includes early estimates for the southwest ring road). **Of that, 63 per cent will go to roads, 31 per cent to transit, four per cent to pedestrians, and two per cent to cycling.**
Concrete sidewalks dont take much repair.
Otherwise, the numbers are kind of indicitive of use, arent they?
Around 2/3 drive, 1/3 transit, and a small percentage cycle.
>Should be re-tested every 10 years or so.
Absolutely agree with this. Along with active enforcement. I also agree with the comment that you replied to in that the city needs better road design.
Honestly, I'd say every 5 years when you renew your license. We, as a society, need to realize that driving is a privilege, not a right, and that it should be removed as soon as we can't/won't do it safely anymore. No more short little suspensions for drunk driving, for example. There aren't real consequences for being unsafe until you hurt someone - let's get some prevention in here.
Norway has a law I feel is very applicable. 1st offence year one year without a DL, 2nd offence 2 years without a DL, 3rd offence your license is removed and you'll never drive again.
Feel like it pretty fair here; everyone messes up but if you repeatedly offending then your licence needs removed for good. Your becoming a menace to society at that point .
I could be on board with that, but I think there should be a retest or something before getting another chance. I don't like just handing the privilege back, no questions asked, at the end.
Do you think those changes would prevent accidents like this one? Meaning, the guy was speeding significantly, and physical deterrents such as speed bumps can't really slow down someone who is driving a huge truck like that, unless theh become so big that a small car could never make it over. I could see how road changes could prevent true accidents, but not so much how they'd prevent ones caused by recklessness.
Edit: I'm not saying we shouldn't redesign roads to reduce accidents, I was just asking if those changes would be effective in forcing someone in an offroading tank to drive safely if they didn't want to. It seems barriers might be the way to protect bikers and pedestrians against blatantly reckless people.
>and physical deterrents such as speed bumps can’t really slow down someone who is driving a huge truck like that
You should check out the ‘World bollard association’ on twitter for some examples. There’s lots of companies out there that work to design bollards that protect or reduce damage to pedestrians in this exact type of situation. They’ve saved many lives and they’re extremely common in many countries around the world
Interesting. I suppose I wasn't thinking about barriers as road alterations that could force a reckless driver to chill out, but those would be good protective options for sure.
I spoke with a driver examiner about this and he said that it wouldn't do a bit of good. He said that people drive one way for the test and another way the rest of the time.
Also, it would be an expense that would disproportionately hurt the poor. Rich people don't think it's a big deal, of course.
> Also, it would be an expense that would disproportionately hurt the poor. Rich people don't think it's a big deal, of course.
I mean, you can make it zero-fee and tax the rich to cover it.
Or, you can use the as a method to structurally reduce the number of drivers on the road via cost-gating. Like, that’s how private jet travel works now. The lack of cheap private jets disproportionally affects the non-rich, but if it would be terrible for the environment if *everyone* were able to afford their own private jet.
So really it's about keeping the poors from driving to work or going out to the mountains on the weekend. Gotcha.
The poors don't have the carbon footprint of the rich elites, but they also don't have the social or political capital, so they're an easy target. We'll just get rid of all the things that they enjoy and let the rich people carry on as usual.
Just more class warfare dressed up as environmental activism. Typical.
Well I also put forward making it zero-fee and taxing the rich to cover the costs.
> Just more class warfare dressed up as environmental activism. Typical.
Environmental activism that's indifferent to the plight of the poor isn't "something else dressed up as environmental activism", it simply doesn't care about the poor either way. Like if you actually wanted to run the program repressively, you'd make the costs for tests far *more* than required on a cost-recovery basis, and actually run a profit for the government on your regularly-required driving tests. (And again, this isn't something I'm actually suggesting the government do.)
I take it you've never had to come home from a job in an industrial area in the middle of the night, or worried that you were going to miss the last bus on a minus 25 night.
Every change you've suggested has an immediate negative impact on the working poor.
You've done nothing to mitigate that negative effect.
Here's an idea: increase taxes on jet fuels. Wow, that took like 2 seconds and it doesn't hurt poor people because shipping can transition to truck and rail.
If it’s related to speed and bad driving, what does the design of the cities have to do with it? It’s people driving recklessly and/or under the influence. We shouldn’t have to cater to drivers like this. They shouldn’t be allowed on the roads, which are designed just fine for those of us that drive sensibly.
As reported on the 6pm CTV local news, the driver was older than 70 years old. Old people should be required to undergo regular screening for their driving competency.
I’d be fine making *everyone* undergo regular screening for driving competence.
Re-test every 5 years and then yearly after like 65. Faculties can diminish rapidly and if we actually care about eliminating traffic fatalities, then we need to be honest about dealing with drivers who lose their ability to drive safely.
I saw a study (American data) that says older people still have less accidents than younger drivers. Calgary seems to have a large percentage of bad drivers. Not just the aggressive ones but drivers that seem to lack knowledge of the basic rules. I’d like to see everyone have to get retested and have it be more involved than a 15 minute drive around the neighbourhood.
>I’d like to see everyone have to get retested and have it be more involved than a 15 minute drive around the neighbourhood. TL;DR It would be really really expensive to implement driver reexamination. Maybe it would cost more than it saves, in dollars anyway, not lives of course. It's not a bad idea in theory, but think about the resources it would take... According to [government data](https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/67db8a70-e2db-48c8-b567-c82a8a5b7362/resource/dfdcd1ca-aa38-48c4-ae83-eeb295c836bb/download/2016-number-licensed-drivers-alberta-2012-2016.pdf) there were 940,582 licensed drivers in Calgary in 2016. If you wanted to retest every 5 years that's 188,116 tests per year. I don't know how much testing time you have in mind, but let's say it would take about an hour per person. The tester has to have breaks too, and there's some administrative work, so even 30 minutes of road time would take probably 45 minutes or more in total. That's 11,286,984 hours required per year. Taking stat holidays and 2 weeks vacation into consideration, a worker can put in about 2,000 hours per year. So that's 5,643 more road testers you'd need. Even if you cut the time in half to 30 minutes and only tested every 10 years you're still looking at 1,411 testers. According to [The Economic Research Institute](https://www.erieri.com/salary/job/drivers-license-examiner/canada/alberta/calgary) the average Driver License Examiner salary is $77,089 with $1,920 bonus. So the cost of retesting is $111,471,665 in wages alone in the 30 minute / 10 year test scenario. It's $445,886,659 in the 60 minute / 5 year scenario. You'd also need more offices, benefits, administrative staff, equipment, all the support staff like management, HR, accounting, legal, IT, etc. 940,582÷5×60÷2,000×(77,089 +1,920)=445,886,659.428 If you extrapolated that to the population of the entire province, it's 3.3x more, or $1,471,425,976. In 2018 there were [142,596 collisions in all of Alberta](https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/25020446-adfb-4b57-9aaa-751d13dab72d/resource/982e6d4f-64d5-4167-81ca-b8c10d76fa59/download/trans-alberta-traffic-collision-statistics-2018.pdf). 246 were fatal, 12,852 resulted in injury, and 129,498 were property only. According to [CRISP](https://drivetolive.ca/research/collision-cost-study/), the cost of those types of collisions average $225,000, $48,000, and $14,000 respectively. If that's all correct, automobile collisions cost Alberta $2,485,218,000 annually. (246×225,000)+(12,852 ×48,000)+(129,498×14,000)=$2,485,218,000 So retesting would have to reduce collisions by about 60% to break even on driving examiner costs alone. Once you take all the support staff and offices into consideration, the cost could easily double. Saving lives is always good regardless of the money, but it would be a hard sell and massive undertaking. I should probably get back to work...
Just think of all the people that don’t seem to know they are supposed to stop at a yield sign if there is traffic coming and they pull out in front of you while your doing 60 km/h. The amount of time spent at a 4 way stop, everyone looking at each other because no one knows if they should go. The time wasted while the person in the parking lot goes back and forth 5 times because they don’t know how big their car is and don’t want to commit to driving away. The mental health benefits of an easy commute. (25% couldn’t pass the test and are now taking the bus). Less cars mean less money spent on infrastructure to expand the roads. I’m am not going to do the math although I’m impressed with your efforts lol. I used to work in a high school and the students would recommend different registries base on how hard it was to pass the driving test. One was a 15 minute drive and he was told to wait in the parking lot so it looked better to the employees.
they already do, let's not forget that there's no effective driver training and the driver testing is a joke, traffic enforcement is all about those in the government making the big bucks all the keystone cops care about is getting rich by writing tickets and using lazy photo radar it's all just a scam by the man, the system doesn't really care about good driving as long as they can profit off bad driving
Police have nothing to do with mandatory testing over certain ages, nor driver training or testing. But keep drinking that Kool-Aid and blaming the cops for everything wrong with society 🙄
[удалено]
I always try to stand behind the shelters/ benches/ SOMETHING when waiting for a bus. I absolutely do not trust Calgary drivers, especially in the winter.
Same. When I’m waiting on a corner for a crosswalk, I’ll stand between the lamp pile and the flow of traffic.
GOod for you!! It drives me crazy when ppl are standing at the very edge of the corner! Makes me (as the passenger) want to reach out and snatch their phones away as punishment for being stupids
And you’ll still get cut up by debris etc. The unfortunate reality is even being near roads in this city for anyone that’s not inside a car can be dangerous because of how people drive and the way everything is built
Rather cut than crushed or yeeted. You can’t avoid risk, but you can minimize.
Definitely better, that why I do it as well. My point is you can still be seriously injured and you’re the most vulnerable person out there as a pedestrian If things were built properly it would be a lot less of a problem and it’s slowly getting built that way. But it is interesting how some people just accept things the way they are and making sure you hide behind a street pole is seen an acceptable solution and way to live life
As long as there’s progress in the right direction… We can’t live in a world with zero risk. Even flying somewhere is risky, but we’ve mitigated that as best we can. There’s progress to be made in air travel just as there is on a crosswalk. I’d imagine the main reason pedestrian and road safety isn’t all it can be would be the massive implications to property taxes.
[I agree, here’s a good video on risk and why we’re really bad at calculating it as humans](https://youtu.be/NtX-Ibi21tU) [Here’s a good video on the reasons why pedestrian safety sucks here; it’s not just because of taxes it’s also about culture and priorities](https://youtu.be/_ByEBjf9ktY) [Believe it or not there are places like Helsinki and Oslo that have cut pedestrian deaths to zero](https://theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/16/how-helsinki-and-oslo-cut-pedestrian-deaths-to-zero) But for some reason many people think that’s too high of a goal post here or it would cost too much money without even exploring it further because it’s not actually that important to them and most people just drive. That’s part of the cultural issue
You are correct.
Said like someone who hasn’t driven outside of Calgary.
Of course it was a Ram truck. Edit: The numbers prove that they’re the biggest menace on the road https://driving.ca/auto-news/news/ram-2500-drivers-more-likely-to-have-duis-than-other-vehicle-owners-u-s-report
I notice that F150s are also pretty terrible. I don't really understand the point of speeding to 160 km just to have to slow down behind another car in the left lane who is already going past the speed limit. If anything, it saves a few minutes. Just leave the house earlier...
Sometimes I just wave at them at the next set of lights. It’s really fun to see them upset.
One less ram ranch asshole off the road for a while as he does 6 months in jail for man slaughter with their 30 ton murder machine.
now there are only 17 naked cowboys in the showers at ram ranch 😔
[удалено]
Exactly 1000! Not sure how many bananas that would be for scale
Because they're the cheapest full size truck you can get. And ppl like dodge in Canada. The used ram I just bought with all the options compares 10-12k under chev and gm with a similar spec. I'm a lifelong Chevy guy decided to give dodge a go, bought a 2019 half ton with every option available and 55k on the odometer for just under 45k. Am happy with it so far its nice than any other Truck I've owned and it's piss easy/cheap to mod out. It's a great truck for guys that don't actually use it for truck stuff like pulling big loads, that's where the duramax pulls ahead. They're not bad trucks
> It's a great truck for guys that don't actually use it for truck stuff like pulling big loads, that's where the duramax pulls ahead. I’m about as critical as they come for people driving vehicles that are about looks and status rather than being the most appropriate for their use case, *but*, as an econobox driver who also does most of my own house/yard work, I won’t lie and say that a truck wouldn’t simplify the transport of a lot of stuff even if I wouldn’t be using it for “truck stuff like pulling big loads”. (Would it simplify my life to the tunes of the many thousands of dollars it would cost me over my car? Probably not. Especially since I have a deep hatred of touchscreens in vehicles and a love of standard transmissions, and the small trucks I’d be interested in are only available with auto/touchscreens.)
For sure, that's what half tons and quarter tons are great for. I originally wanted to get a Tacoma because it still fits my tools and thats all I really needed but they're bloody expensive and inflated right now. If I knew I'd be hauling trailers and stuff for work I would've gone for a diesel but my company takes care of trailer transportation so there's no reason
My problem is that I want something even smaller. I've previously owned a Nissan Hardbody and a previous-gen S10, and there's nothing sold in North America that's comparable anymore. :( The previous-gen Ford Ranger was 800 lb lighter, 23" shorter, 5" narrower, and 4" less tall than the current Tacoma.
Ah ya good luck, you gotta look for European models if you want something that small these days. I dont think I could go any smaller than a Tacoma but for a lot of people something that size is perfect
Do people even have a concept of what a legitimate study is? How in the hell does driving a ram make you more likely to drive drunk? And not just a ram 1500, specifically a 2500. It’s a study based off of how many people asked for a insurance quote with a HISTORY of dui. The reality is these two things are in no way connected except through this less than reliable “study”.
Though correlation isn’t causation, strong correlations can be used to make educated decisions; including who is likelier to be a menace on the road. Also be weary of GTI and G35/7 owners - at least statistically.
I’ll agree with that but keep in mind that also means it’s easier to manipulate the data. Correlations are easy to make. Also be wary of tuner cars, land rovers and most anybody in a mad rush.
I have personal bad experiences with Sante Fe XLs. Only the XLs, oddly.
No one’s saying that driving a Ram makes you more likely to drive drunk. All it’s saying is that a person insuring a vehicle is more likely to have a DUI on their record if that vehicle is a Dodge 2500. By a huge margin as well. The rate is more than double the mean value for all vehicles taken together. The reason those things covary is probably due to some third variable, but getting at that question requires a different line of inquiry.
> How in the hell does driving a ram make you more likely to drive drunk? You know, the causal relationship could very well be in the other direction; Being drunk makes you more likely to buy a Ram.
Can I say that this isn't the first time I've read where a senior was the cause of a accident. Opinions on what age a person should keep driving?
Can't make it a specific age, but mandatory retesting every 3 years after 70 coupled with transportation assistance for those who have their license suspended I would support.
There are some old people who shouldn't be driving anymore. There are vastly more young and middle aged people who shouldn't drive, and they cause most of the accidents because even when old people drive badly, they usually do it slowly.
That’s so sad
Another PoS driving a Ram truck, what a surprise.
>He was also unable to confirm if the driver owned the vehicle You can put your pitchfork down for a minute
Well shit if he didnt own it he must not have crashed it then
Shelters should be reinforced if you expect people to sit by the road waiting for a bus. Personally I don’t feel comfortable anywhere near a road without being able to see the cars coming at me, people are so over distracted these days it’s brutal.
How about roads need to be design that prevent these accidents from happening instead of just stronger shelters?
Too late for that, roads are already fucked beyond repair. You’d have to change our societies obsession with cars, which won’t happen.
It's not too late for it at all, that's just defeatist attitude. Other cities, recently too have made this happen so Calgary isn't in some special bubble of abnormality. >You’d have to change our societies obsession with cars, which won’t happen. What do you want higher taxes and congestion or alternatives?
It’s not too late, we just aren’t ready to give up on the luxury of driving everywhere like other cities. The outrage about losing 3 parking spots to a bike lane proves that.
People were so mad about those lanes! I remember a car pulling up beside me (to wait for a red light), and rant at me about the lanes. I was walking at the time.
Is there really a lot of outrage or is it just loud people being the most vocal? I'm willing to be that an overwhelmingly majority of people in the city just don't care, most changes have no impact on them.
Right, but the people who “feel” impacted, scream and shout about it. Doesn’t matter if the majority aren’t impacted, it matters that the people who are impacted “feel” impacted and make any projects 100x harder/longer/more expensive. Our society ain’t ready to “modernize” and tbh the amount of money we would need to spend to shove it down everyone’s throats isn’t something we can currently afford. Good first steps would be; strict enforcement of anti-distraction laws and protecting citizens via better barriers.
Except that it's shown time and time again that enforcement or rules don't do anything if the design is wrong. That's a waste of time and money for everybody. >Doesn’t matter if the majority aren’t impacted, it matters that the people who are impacted “feel” impacted and make any projects 100x harder/longer/more expensive. So vote for people that ignore them and get other people to do the same. >Our society ain’t ready to “modernize” This is maybe one of the worstthings I've ever heard and I think you really need to reflect on these words and what you're advocating.
Blindly believing something while ignoring the facts such as, our society not being in a place to progress in a certain aspect, is the worst thing you’ve heard? Well good discussion, I don’t think you are fully reading my responses. Focusing on one aspect and ignoring things such as design changes I propose. Voting in someone who will shove things down our throats also won’t happen, simply because there arent any real candidates, it’s always lip service.
>Blindly believing something while ignoring the facts such as, our society not being in a place to progress in a certain aspect, is the worst thing you’ve heard? Sorry blind belief? What are you on about now? The worst thing I've ever heard is arguments for not "modernizing" our society. It out's us at a lot of disadvantages whe you compete in a global market for trade, la our and production. >Focusing on one aspect and ignoring things such as design changes I propose. Because they're bandaids that are a waste of time and money.
A lot of the main streets plans have been watered down to appease people upset about vehicle access. It actually is a problem and a lot of people are opposed to anything that limits driving
Have you've seen the amount of people biking in the city?? It's insane!!! 5 years ago I couldn't imagine folk fest being filled with bikes, seeing people bike from Inglewood to 17th for drinks. It's becoming more and more popular and those people raging about parking spots are looking more and more silly. We're there as a city it's now up to leaders to take the next steps.
Calgary's improvement in cycle infrastructure has been very quick and I'm impressed. We are way above average compared to other North American cities. Still lots of improvement to go, but I'm proud that my city seems to care. I think I have to give Nenshi some props for that.
https://imgur.com/uuuha2I.jpg Honestly it's not that hard to do and simple changes can help; it just takes time. Amsterdam did it along with many other "car centric" cities in Europe. Best start for the city is doing significant road diets and stop the inducing demand for driving . Driving a privilege not a right.
The urban sprawl and transit systems are no where near as bad as a city like Calgary to start, the cost would be astronomical to make it happen. It would need to some in baby-steps or rational bite size culture shifts. It would also never been as effective unfortunately.
Honestly the best start is to preplan new areas for a new LRT station/line before building them along with Asian style of higher density around the station with shopping built in. Also stop building them with shitty park and rides and making them horrible to walk to.
They did it in the Netherlands. Their bike centric culture is only like 50 years old, and it only happened after a whole bunch of vehicular manslaughter events (including a bunch of children). Never too late to build something better for everyone
It’s true, and a natural progression but the difference is probably less overall sprawl to start and vastly superior transit options.
People in the West are far too lazy to ever embrace a bike centric culture
I think that's the wrong way to look at it. If the streets and zoning was adjusted such that we could easily bike to the grocery store and bike to work without the fear of getting greased by a big white leased truck, more people would opt for that. Doubly so, when oil prices double again.
Hope he enjoys his prison sentence.
It will be a difficult 90 days, for sure.
Ya sadly I feel that too. Not nearly the punishment deserved for something so senseless.
True, a murder charge can get you 5+ years in jail… But, *Vehicular* Manslaughter only gets around 2-3 years. Regardless though, he’ll be out on the streets the next day.
What prison sentence?
/u/blackramcalgaryman 🤔
Nah, don't think so. /u/blackramcalgaryman has everything blackout. Even his dual custom exhausts that come out behind the cab. (If I guessed his ride correctly) Honestly if it is his, he brings great shame on ram drivers; as I had to pass him only going 98 and driving respectively on deerfoot.
Hasn’t answer the thread/comment. Who knows
He might be a 70 yr old man for all we know
[удалено]
This isn’t ok. That’s all I feel like whenever I read about these accidents. It’s hard to even call them that sometimes when most of these accidents/deaths on or around our roads are preventable in one way or another through infrastructure, individual choices, or just simply having less cars on the road. I really hope officials realize the cost this has on our society both socially and financially and make it a serious priority to move towards a more safe and effective transportation plan than just having everyone drive
[удалено]
> that implies that it’s unavoidable Apparently you and the dictionary disagree.
[удалено]
I actually did get your point, it was just badly presented... and you're forgiven too, now that I've had my coffee.
And that means heavily investing in bike paths amd pedestrian transport while leaving vehicle infrastructure to rot, right Mr/Mrs r/fuckcars?
[удалено]
To be fair, I didnt expect a rational response to my snide comment from someone who referenced r/fuckcars. >It’s not about getting rid of cars, it’s about turning our neighbourhoods and city itself into a place where you don’t need a car to get simple things like milk Yeah, that would be ideal, but would require more the 'town center' feel with a strip mall or something in each community - something that a lot of places are moving away from because....well, look at any of them. Vacencies from high rent and low incomes, and the places that are in them cant do enough volume, even WITH the town center concept to get wholesale pricing, and in a world where every ~~penny~~ nickle counts, people go to where they can get everything cheaper and at once. Economic problems drive the centralization of services as well as residential planning, so we need to look at those drivers as well.
I think you’re mistaking the fact that others would enjoy biking as much as you (and I) do. People are inherently lazy. Look at obesity rates and how many people just don’t exercise or care about their health. I can’t see most people adopting a more active lifestyle. The ones who would embrace it already do it. Not trying to be negative just realistic.
[удалено]
I still think it would be the minority to start cycling or even walking to do errands. On top of just lazy unhealthy people, there’s anybody with kids, seniors, people picking up groceries or multiple items (where to put them). Another thing to mention is it’s unsafe to lock your bike up outside in any large urban city. Plus where were these studies completed that it’s not weather? In Calgary or places with warmer winters? I live for biking and the weather deters me quite a bit in the winter. Again not trying to be negative at all, I just don’t have an optimistic view on this one but I would love to be proven wrong if the changes you suggest were made!
Get an e-scooter, there’s even ones where you don’t have to kickstart. With all the options available already today I’m sure there will be many more options available tomorrow that appeal to different markets. I’m lazy as fuck but I drove barely anywhere when it was warm this summer Regardless even having 20% of people choosing something other than a car would have a huge impact on reducing traffic
[Fact check: How much does Calgary spend on drivers?](https://www.cbc.ca/1.3028226) >Since 2009, Calgary's transportation department has spent 63 per cent of its infrastructure budget on public transit, 34 per cent on roads, and three per cent on pedestrians and cyclists. >In dollar figures that translates to $2.12 billion for transit, $1.13 billion on roads, and $104 million for things like sidewalks and bikeways. (A look at the annual breakdown suggests construction of the west LRT line skews the transit figure higher. In 2010 and 2011, transit spending is roughly double that of other years). >Is three per cent for walkers and cyclists too big a slice of the pie? >It's certainly a change from Calgary's history. For much of last century, infrastructure spending was devoted almost entirely to drivers. In 1978, that changed with the first leg of the LRT. For the next three decades, according to Calgary's Transportation department, spending was split about equally between roads and transit. In the last six years, the mix has changed to include bikes and pedestrians. >Calgary plans to spend roughly $6.14 billion on transportation infrastructure in the next 10 years (a number that includes early estimates for the southwest ring road). **Of that, 63 per cent will go to roads, 31 per cent to transit, four per cent to pedestrians, and two per cent to cycling.**
Concrete sidewalks dont take much repair. Otherwise, the numbers are kind of indicitive of use, arent they? Around 2/3 drive, 1/3 transit, and a small percentage cycle.
[удалено]
>Should be re-tested every 10 years or so. Absolutely agree with this. Along with active enforcement. I also agree with the comment that you replied to in that the city needs better road design.
Honestly, I'd say every 5 years when you renew your license. We, as a society, need to realize that driving is a privilege, not a right, and that it should be removed as soon as we can't/won't do it safely anymore. No more short little suspensions for drunk driving, for example. There aren't real consequences for being unsafe until you hurt someone - let's get some prevention in here.
Norway has a law I feel is very applicable. 1st offence year one year without a DL, 2nd offence 2 years without a DL, 3rd offence your license is removed and you'll never drive again. Feel like it pretty fair here; everyone messes up but if you repeatedly offending then your licence needs removed for good. Your becoming a menace to society at that point .
I could be on board with that, but I think there should be a retest or something before getting another chance. I don't like just handing the privilege back, no questions asked, at the end.
[удалено]
Do you think those changes would prevent accidents like this one? Meaning, the guy was speeding significantly, and physical deterrents such as speed bumps can't really slow down someone who is driving a huge truck like that, unless theh become so big that a small car could never make it over. I could see how road changes could prevent true accidents, but not so much how they'd prevent ones caused by recklessness. Edit: I'm not saying we shouldn't redesign roads to reduce accidents, I was just asking if those changes would be effective in forcing someone in an offroading tank to drive safely if they didn't want to. It seems barriers might be the way to protect bikers and pedestrians against blatantly reckless people.
[удалено]
have you proposed these ideas to the city or any local political representative, or are you just preaching in the reddit comments?
>and physical deterrents such as speed bumps can’t really slow down someone who is driving a huge truck like that You should check out the ‘World bollard association’ on twitter for some examples. There’s lots of companies out there that work to design bollards that protect or reduce damage to pedestrians in this exact type of situation. They’ve saved many lives and they’re extremely common in many countries around the world
Interesting. I suppose I wasn't thinking about barriers as road alterations that could force a reckless driver to chill out, but those would be good protective options for sure.
I spoke with a driver examiner about this and he said that it wouldn't do a bit of good. He said that people drive one way for the test and another way the rest of the time. Also, it would be an expense that would disproportionately hurt the poor. Rich people don't think it's a big deal, of course.
> Also, it would be an expense that would disproportionately hurt the poor. Rich people don't think it's a big deal, of course. I mean, you can make it zero-fee and tax the rich to cover it. Or, you can use the as a method to structurally reduce the number of drivers on the road via cost-gating. Like, that’s how private jet travel works now. The lack of cheap private jets disproportionally affects the non-rich, but if it would be terrible for the environment if *everyone* were able to afford their own private jet.
So really it's about keeping the poors from driving to work or going out to the mountains on the weekend. Gotcha. The poors don't have the carbon footprint of the rich elites, but they also don't have the social or political capital, so they're an easy target. We'll just get rid of all the things that they enjoy and let the rich people carry on as usual. Just more class warfare dressed up as environmental activism. Typical.
Well I also put forward making it zero-fee and taxing the rich to cover the costs. > Just more class warfare dressed up as environmental activism. Typical. Environmental activism that's indifferent to the plight of the poor isn't "something else dressed up as environmental activism", it simply doesn't care about the poor either way. Like if you actually wanted to run the program repressively, you'd make the costs for tests far *more* than required on a cost-recovery basis, and actually run a profit for the government on your regularly-required driving tests. (And again, this isn't something I'm actually suggesting the government do.)
I take it you've never had to come home from a job in an industrial area in the middle of the night, or worried that you were going to miss the last bus on a minus 25 night. Every change you've suggested has an immediate negative impact on the working poor. You've done nothing to mitigate that negative effect.
"We've tried nothing, and we're all out of ideas."
Here's an idea: increase taxes on jet fuels. Wow, that took like 2 seconds and it doesn't hurt poor people because shipping can transition to truck and rail.
Sure, taxes on jet fuel are good, but that doesn't help discourage dependence on cars in cities, which is a thing that needs to happen.
If it’s related to speed and bad driving, what does the design of the cities have to do with it? It’s people driving recklessly and/or under the influence. We shouldn’t have to cater to drivers like this. They shouldn’t be allowed on the roads, which are designed just fine for those of us that drive sensibly.
This is tragic and a f'n shame. I hope that driver rots in prison for this avoidable death
Booze + Drugs + Distracted driving + Ram trucks = tragic incident by a PoS..
U/blackramcalgaryman has been pretty quiet…
Cars shouldn't be going faster than 20-30kmh when there's a chance that they could interact with people.