Traffic deaths at lowest in 60 years

Source: USA Today

Traffic deaths in the USA are at a 60-year low despite a slight uptick in miles driven, and the chances of dying on the road are the lowest ever, the Department of Transportation says.

The number of people who died on the nation's roads fell 3,615, or 9.7%, from 2008 to 33,808 last year, the latest available data from the department. That was the lowest total since 33,186 people were killed in 1950, when there were one-fifth the number of vehicles on the road than today.

"This is unprecedented, historic progress," says Barbara Harsha, executive director of the Governors Highway Safety Association, which has traffic safety offices in the states.

Harsha attributes the decline in deaths to a number of safety-related factors, including increased seat belt use, stronger enforcement of drunken-driving laws, improved roads, safer vehicles and better coordination in the states.

Read more: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-09-09-1Aroaddeaths09_ST_N.htm

Sure the hell can't be driver education because from what I have seen, we are lacking in that area.

further drastically reduce these numbers.

It would be wonderful if you had to prove you could drive to get a license or renew one.

I wish they would take drivers education for our teens back inside the schools.

When I learned to drive in Iowa, I was able to get a permit at 14 with allowed me to drive with a parent or certified driver education teacher. My dad taught me how to drive but that was coupled with a class in school which focused on driving rules and all the safety stuff (1974). Following the class, we had to take several weeks of driving with the instructor every day. It was all state run through the school.

Only after all these course could we get our drivers license. I think we could have gotten it but the state would do the testing and insurance would be prohibitively high.

Here in Ohio, the whole system is privatized and you pay a company $500 to take you child sit them in a classroom every night for 3 weeks and then 6 hours of driving where the instructor tells them they need to look around while they are driving and teaches them to drive forward and backward through 5 cones.

The student driver then is takes the written test and proves to the officer they can do the 5 cone maneuver and they are turned loose on the road.

If Mom or Dad didn't do a good job of teaching to drive, they are out of luck.

Imagine how well we'd be doing and how many lives saved had we actually

gotten the Tucker cars on the road!!

We must acknowledge the car upgrades and safety regulations as the main reason, but I have to throw in something that came to mind right away.

Is it just me, but our main highways, everywhere, are much more crowded compared to twenty years ago.
Take I-95, anywhere, as an example. You would think that "more" traffic" would lead to more accidents,
but maybe the increased traffic makes drivers pay attention and does not allow for more reckless higher speed driving.
Every time I drive on highways, especially at rush hour, the roadways are so overcrowded, that most people
drive in a safe manner, one behind the other. Drivers are prepared for that quick traffic jam slow down,
thus pay attention to cars in front of them.

My point is I think driver habits have changed in the last twenty years. I can remember as a teen with a new license back in the 1970s...
stretching out the pedal to over 100 mph on stretches of open highway. I can't see anyone trying that on today's highways, too crowded.
Too much police enforcement. High penalties getting caught for reckless driving. Younger drivers just know better now to not try that kind of stuff.

You should visit Dallas/Fort Worth sometime, then you might understand why I chuckled a bit :)

In my area of NJ -- they've done something over the last three years or so to

screw up a number of major connections -- including trafic on Garden State.

Don't know if it will eventually clear up -- or permanent!!

ALSO, locally -- our NJ State legislature permitted TRUCKS to come onto all of

our local roads -- that was 5 years or more ago. Think that will eventually have

some serious consequences for local drivers. One think to get hit with an SUV

but entirely another to get hit by an 18 wheeler!!

and that's Ralph Nader -- and Tucker --

Tucker, I guess, will never be acknowledged in that regard?

Quite a story!

blame on Democrats. The Republicans fought environmental laws and have been proven wrong. Republicans sided with the tobacco companies and were proven wrong. The Republicans deny climate change now. Have they ever been right about anything? To this day most of them will not admit they wrong about any of it.

has nothing to do with intelligence, logic -- nor conscience!!

a number of large, unsafe vehicle may have been removed from the roads...?

Why isn't that fact pointed out?

No jobs out there...

Result of an interesting partnership. Government, IIHS (Insurance Industry), People/manufacturers.
I am not aware of a government requirement for 8+ AirBags on a new vehicle or for a rating in the offset impact test. But the Marketing departments at the auto manufacturers sure learned that it was a requirement to compete. We should probably also acknowledge the Boxy but Safe, original Volvo for it's contribution to public awareness that vehicles could be safer.

the year that dual front airbags were mandated by law.(1998)

How many pre-1998 American made models are on the road now?