>>> What makes you think they're preventable?

Some accidents would be hard to prevent without disproportionate effort.
BUT
The vast majority of accidents are caused by a person doing what they don't 
usually do and what other people also don't usually do and what nobody is 
meant to do (eg crossing the centre line). Or by someone doing what they 
often do but that most other people don't usually do and that most people 
are never meant to do (eg driving drunk).

The 30%+ "drift off accidents" in the US (if the stat I read be true) are 
surely almost all preventable if there was the will. Assuming suicides are a 
small fraction (maybe not) then it's inattention or going to sleep. MAYBE 
also excessive speed for the corner. If you don't rate these as preventable 
then I guess they're not preventable.

As has been pointed out, some people are far safer drivers measured over 
long periods, than others. Some of this is just plain skill. Much is, I 
think many will agree, just plain carelessness and/or attitude. For the 
areas where it's skill (or it's inverse, inability) then fitting the 
behaviour to the capability should have an effect. The fact that we are not 
financially or politically prepared to do this does not make them 
unpreventable  - it just means that we don't wish to prevent them for 
whatever reason. As long as the road death toll hovers within the realm of 
acceptable social contract we are not liable to get TOO much change. In the 
US, somewhere around a few percent of total annual death rate is acceptable 
social contract apparently. What this is traded off against is part of the 
deal. Vietnam got the US, in the end, years of pain, criticism all round and 
vast expenditure for no apparent return (although I'd say that the US does 
appear to be heading towards winning the war in Vietnam based on present 
trends.) (Unlike eg North Korea where the war looks like it will last far 
longer). Back at home, in exchange for 60,000 lives pa you get fantastic 
flexibility, mobility, powerful social and sex symbols and valuable materiel 
to help maintain the consumer cycle. A fair trade, apparently. (That's all 
rather cynical of course BUT in fact that is about the tradeoff. How much 
each person values their own part of the tradeoff and how much they seek to 
contribute to or reduce the cost is up to them.)


        Russell McMahon


_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist