Dougherty Arts Center
Time for Regular Publication of Collision Data
RECEIVED Thu., Nov. 16, 2006
Dear Editor,
It's appalling that a motorist can incapacitate someone while driving blind drunk, and not even lose his driver's license. He's allowed to keep on driving, even though, when armed with a car, he's clearly a danger to everyone. Will it be a surprise if he mows down some schoolchildren?
Dan Mottola reports that between the beginning of 2005 and Sept. 10, 2006, there were 20 car/bicycle collision which seriously injured the bicyclist ["Riding at Risk," News, Nov. 10]. More information would be helpful. Where, when, and under what circumstances did these collisions occur? And why is this information not regularly reported? What about car/pedestrian collisions? Far more pedestrians than bicyclists are killed or disabled by cars. Since very little of this violence is ever publicly reported, people think that driving cars fast and carelessly is safe and normal. This false sense of security makes our streets much more dangerous.
If we want less-deadly streets, the first thing we need is accurate, detailed information about how dangerous the streets are now. More than 30 crashes per day occur on Austin's streets. People are disabled, no one hears about it, and no one loses a driver's license. Such willful ignorance is a recipe for making things worse.
If information about collisions were regularly reported publicly, people would start to realize that cars are dangerous. If motorists who disable people lost their driving privileges, our streets would be much safer. "Being stupid isn't a crime," says a lawyer quoted in Mottola's story. Blindness isn't a crime, but blind people aren't allowed to drive cars. People who show dangerous incompetence in driving should not be licensed to drive. This should be a safety measure, not a moral judgment.
An essential first step toward improving public safety is regular publication of collision data, with details. Let's start there.
It's appalling that a motorist can incapacitate someone while driving blind drunk, and not even lose his driver's license. He's allowed to keep on driving, even though, when armed with a car, he's clearly a danger to everyone. Will it be a surprise if he mows down some schoolchildren?
Dan Mottola reports that between the beginning of 2005 and Sept. 10, 2006, there were 20 car/bicycle collision which seriously injured the bicyclist ["Riding at Risk," News, Nov. 10]. More information would be helpful. Where, when, and under what circumstances did these collisions occur? And why is this information not regularly reported? What about car/pedestrian collisions? Far more pedestrians than bicyclists are killed or disabled by cars. Since very little of this violence is ever publicly reported, people think that driving cars fast and carelessly is safe and normal. This false sense of security makes our streets much more dangerous.
If we want less-deadly streets, the first thing we need is accurate, detailed information about how dangerous the streets are now. More than 30 crashes per day occur on Austin's streets. People are disabled, no one hears about it, and no one loses a driver's license. Such willful ignorance is a recipe for making things worse.
If information about collisions were regularly reported publicly, people would start to realize that cars are dangerous. If motorists who disable people lost their driving privileges, our streets would be much safer. "Being stupid isn't a crime," says a lawyer quoted in Mottola's story. Blindness isn't a crime, but blind people aren't allowed to drive cars. People who show dangerous incompetence in driving should not be licensed to drive. This should be a safety measure, not a moral judgment.
An essential first step toward improving public safety is regular publication of collision data, with details. Let's start there.
Yours truly,
Amy Babich
Amy Babich
