Are humans losing the ability to drive in the snow?

[lunaticfringe]

So I've noticed a trend of idiots flooring their vehicles and generally driving too fast in icy conditions over the last 2/3 winters. They predictably fishtail and dangerously swerve around for a bit before crashing or straightening out.

Am I just getting old? Has anyone else noticed this? Are we not properly passing information on to our youth? Do young people refuse to listen to anything not gleaned from a YouTube video?

[Themrys]

So I've noticed a trend of idiots flooring their vehicles and generally driving too fast in icy conditions over the last 2/3 winters. They predictably fishtail and dangerously swerve around for a bit before crashing or straightening out.

Am I just getting old? Has anyone else noticed this? Are we not properly passing information on to our youth? Do young people refuse to listen to anything not gleaned from a YouTube video?


Are you sure this didn't happen before? Stupid people will be stupid. Driving too fast under any conditions is a common form of idiocy.

I haven't had opportunity to practise driving in snow as there's rarely any snow here, but I know that wet street = drive slower and that ice = drive even slower than that, so I can't imagine it is a lack of knowledge.

If people were losing control of their vehicles while driving slowly and cautiously, it could be the lack of practice due to less snow due to climate change, but driving too fast is such an avoidable mistake, I really cannot imagine it is lack of information.

Unless they won their driver's license in the lottery.

[Kyrell1978]

So I've noticed a trend of idiots flooring their vehicles and generally driving too fast in icy conditions over the last 2/3 winters. They predictably fishtail and dangerously swerve around for a bit before crashing or straightening out.

Am I just getting old? Has anyone else noticed this? Are we not properly passing information on to our youth? Do young people refuse to listen to anything not gleaned from a YouTube video?

I'm going to go with there are probably a few reasons for this. More people are driving in general so there are more poor drivers could be part of the explanation (i.e. the percentage remains the same but with more possibilities the actual number raises). You are getting older and noticing things that you would not have noticed before. This is definitely a thing that happens, our cares and worries shift over time and with that we tend to notice and remember different things. Children do not engage as much with there parents as they used to. A lot of these learning experiences (say about driving) used to come from prolonged road trips where the parent would talk to the child as they drove telling them of certain dangers (black ice) or of how to handle certain situations in real time as they were dealing with them. The trip served as a reminder of what to pass on to the child. Now, even if the parent is talking a good deal of the time the child has their face jammed in an electronic device and is not actually paying any attention.

[truemane]

Children do not engage as much with there parents as they used to. A lot of these learning experiences (say about driving) used to come from prolonged road trips where the parent would talk to the child as they drove telling them of certain dangers (black ice) or of how to handle certain situations in real time as they were dealing with them. The trip served as a reminder of what to pass on to the child. Now, even if the parent is talking a good deal of the time the child has their face jammed in an electronic device and is not actually paying any attention.

Dude, seriously, that's not a thing. I was alive a long time before the proliferation of electronic devices and no one ever used long road trips as ersatz driving lessons. Mostly you napped, or read, or annoyed your sibling(s). And I would gather that any attempts to try to use a road trip as such would have been ignored as much then as they would be now.

I've seen a lot of things blamed on 'the kids and their newfangled devices' but that one is... new.

If age is a factor, then an aging population is probably just as much to blame as a younger one. If not more. And if electronic devices are causing problems, it's because adults are looking at them and not driving. Distracted driving cause more accidents than anything else by a large margin.

What you're seeing, OP, is probably/mostly Confirmation Bias.

[Peelee]

What a silly thought. I, for one, never had the ability to drive in the snow to begin with!

[Telonius]

So I've noticed a trend of idiots flooring their vehicles and generally driving too fast in icy conditions over the last 2/3 winters. They predictably fishtail and dangerously swerve around for a bit before crashing or straightening out.

Am I just getting old? Has anyone else noticed this? Are we not properly passing information on to our youth? Do young people refuse to listen to anything not gleaned from a YouTube video?

This is only one measure of it, but if we're judging by fatality rates we're actually doing pretty well. Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year) has the rate bouncing between 10 and 11 fatalities per 100,000 people from 2009-today. We haven't been that regularly low since 1918-1920. (They don't break out how many of those accidents were in icy conditions; and modern safety features might have a lot to do with it).

I will say that even back when I was learning to drive in the mid-90s (in Erie, PA - so yeah, we got a lot of snow), that on the first snowy day of the year everybody drove like idiots. After a near miss or three they settled down and remembered how to drive. If snow is happening less frequently, that might make it seem worse.

[Rogar Demonblud]

The safety features are another part of the problem. People tend to be sloppier, because they expect the car will fix it. Hence the proliferation of unsafe lane changes (collision avoidance) and speeding and tailgating (predictive braking), among other things.

[thorgrim29]

People actually full-on forget how to drive once the first snow sets in, it's pretty well documented in this totally factual article: https://www.thebeaverton.com/2016/12/millions-canadians-literally-forget-drive-first-snowfall/

[2D8HP]

So I've noticed a trend of...


I've hit "black ice" a couple of times.and "fish-tailed", but I've no memory of driving in the snow.

Ever.

I did see a lot of motorists exchanging info (presumably after collisions), tow trucks, and CHP pulling people over on my drive home at dark o'clock in the afternoon when in was raining yesterday (first rush hour rain in months).

Where I live newcomers arrive every year, and remember how many are "Millennials" (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/03/01/millennials-overtake-baby-boomers/) some of whom are presumably new drivers, so I'm guessing that what you observe isn't so much 'forgeting' as 'never learned'.

[Peelee]

I've hit "black ice" a couple of times.and "fish-tailed", but I've no memory of driving in the snow.

Ever.

I did see a lot of motorists exchanging info (presumably after collisions), tow trucks, and CHP pulling people over on my drive home at dark o'clock in the afternoon when in was raining yesterday (first rush hour rain in months).

Where I live newcomers arrive every year, and remember how many are "Millennials" (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/03/01/millennials-overtake-baby-boomers/) some of whom are presumably new drivers, so I'm guessing that what you observe isn't so much 'forgeting' as 'never learned'.

I really hope there are very few millenials who are new drivers by now.

[2D8HP]

I really hope there are very few millenials who are new drivers by now.


Wait, millenials are old now?

Okay, are there lots of Generation [even younger than millenials]?

[factotum]

I think it's more that the cars have changed, personally. Modern cars tend to have low-profile, wide tyres on them, which look cool and all that but which are really, really bad in the snow--what you want in snowy conditions are narrow tyres that will cut through the snow without too much resistance.

At least, that's my experience--it is far easier to drive in the snow in a car with narrower tyres. When I attended the UKITP meetup in the really bad winter a few years ago I was able to keep going in my Nissan Micra far better than guys in Beemers and the like!

[Ninja_Prawn]

Wait, millenials are old now?

Okay, are there lots of Generation [even younger than millenials]?

Yep. I'm a millennial, so we're definitely not young. The generation after us, who are just now getting driver's licenses and going to university, are most often referred to as Generation Z.

[Peelee]

Wait, millenials are old now?

Okay, are there lots of Generation [even younger than millenials]?

There's a date range, but my shorthand is "in school for 9/11, and can remember it."

[tyckspoon]

Wait, millenials are old now?

Okay, are there lots of Generation [even younger than millenials]?

The commonly accepted leading edge of the Millennial generation is in their mid 30s. Most of us have reproduced by now if that was in our life plans, and our kids are going through the late parts of their compulsory education years. "Millennial" hasn't meant 'kids these days' for at least a few years now; we should start getting "Millennials are raising their kids all wrong, you won't believe this parenting trend!" stories instead of the "Millennials don't treat college the way you did!" and "Millennial workers don't have the same relationship with their jobs that you did!" formulas. I don't think the next generation has been stuck with a name yet - they don't tend to get that sort of attention until they hit college age.

(As I understand the idea 'Millennial' is supposed to refer to people who came to adulthood at or near to the turn of the millennia on the calendar - we're the people those 'You might be a 90's kid if...' memelists are about. "Born during the new millennia" is this next upcoming generation - the Millennials' children.)

[Peelee]

Yep. I'm a millennial, so we're definitely not young. The generation after us, who are just now getting driver's licenses and going to university, are most often referred to as Generation Z.

I prefer the iGen.

[Liquor Box]

Wait, millenials are old now?

Okay, are there lots of Generation [even younger than millenials]?

Yes, millennials are no longer tech savvy, socially conscious, entitled or lazy. There's a new sheriff in town - Gen Z.

[Algeh]

Dude, seriously, that's not a thing. I was alive a long time before the proliferation of electronic devices and no one ever used long road trips as ersatz driving lessons. Mostly you napped, or read, or annoyed your sibling(s). And I would gather that any attempts to try to use a road trip as such would have been ignored as much then as they would be now.

I've seen a lot of things blamed on 'the kids and their newfangled devices' but that one is... new.


You have clearly never been on a car ride with my father, let alone a road trip.

I have been on many.

Dad's favorite subjects are commentary on everyone else's driving habits, traffic engineering considerations that may or may not apply to the current roadway, and stories from his rally driving days. Any of all of these could easily be considered as ersatz driving lessons, and some of them were even intended that way. (The stories of how they used to all be on CB radios driving from Portland to LA in the middle of the night for rally events and apexing corners when the lead car said it was clear so as to be able to drive faster were, hopefully, not intended as such, but perhaps they were as well.)

Perhaps families without rally racing traffic engineers talk about different things on road trips, though.

My theory on people being terrible at snow driving is that people are terrible at driving. This is my theory about drivers in general, it's just that snow is less forgiving of mistakes than pavement.

[Rockphed]

Yep. I'm a millennial, so we're definitely not young. The generation after us, who are just now getting driver's licenses and going to university, are most often referred to as Generation Z.


There's a date range, but my shorthand is "in school for 9/11, and can remember it."

My definition of "Millenial" is pretty much "born between '91 and '05. I understand that most other people move those dates up by 5 - 10 years, but I think those dates more accurately impose a "probably grew up before the internet was a thing" cut-off which I feel is actually a generational gap.

[Peelee]

My definition of "Millenial" is pretty much "born between '91 and '05. I understand that most other people move those dates up by 5 - 10 years, but I think those dates more accurately impose a "probably grew up before the internet was a thing" cut-off which I feel is actually a generational gap.

I remember having the internet in '98 or so. Ain't nobody born after 2000 grew up before the internet was a thing, and that's being pretty liberal to boot.

[Rockphed]

I remember having the internet in '98 or so. Ain't nobody born after 2000 grew up before the internet was a thing, and that's being pretty liberal to boot.

Sorry, my definition of "millenial" is pretty much "grew up with the internet". I define people older than that (which includes myself and all my siblings) as a different generation of somewhat less silly people.

[Peelee]

Sorry, my definition of "millenial" is pretty much "grew up with the internet".

Thsts what I call iGen (or, at least, that's the term I've heard that I like best). Millennials, well, grew up with the millennium change. Hence my easy shorthand, "I'm school for 9/11, and can remember it." Which means roughly, what, third grade through high school?

*googles*


The Silent Generation: Born 1928-1945 (73-90 years old)
Baby Boomers: Born 1946-1964 (54-72 years old)
Generation X: Born 1965-1980 (38-53 years old)
Millennials: Born 1981-1996*(22-37 years old)

Limes up pretty nicely with my shorthand, I'd say. Toss in college underclassmen and call it a day.

[veti]

Modern cars put a lot of buffers between the driver and the road at the best of times. Between automatic transmission and fuel injection and active suspension and traction control and ABS, a lot of the feeling has gone out of driving.

It wouldn't surprise me if people who have only ever driven a modern car, have far less intuitive grasp of what it can really do. All these systems will keep you safe, but they'll also prevent you from getting the same kind of feedback from the car, and the road, that you would in a car of earlier generations.

[Knaight]

Modern cars put a lot of buffers between the driver and the road at the best of times. Between automatic transmission and fuel injection and active suspension and traction control and ABS, a lot of the feeling has gone out of driving.

There's also been a shift from crashes that left the car mildly dented and in need of having its former occupants hosed out to the car being totaled and people walking away. This is overwhelmingly a good thing, but it does encourage some recklessness. On the other hand, both the data and anecdata of decades past suggests more than a little recklessness as well.

[Ninja_Prawn]

Regarding the OP's question, I'd definitely suspect climate change has something to do with it. I grew up in Southeast England and when I was little, it snowed every winter. But by the time I was in high school, we were lucky if there was even one day of snow - and I can only recall settled snow on the ground only once after 2000. So I never had the opportunity to practice on snow as a learner (I learned in 2006).

The first time I ever drove in proper snow was last year, after I moved to Scotland!

[Glorthindel]

I would say its seasonal; every year when the weather changes, its as though everyone has forgotten how to drive in these conditions during the summer. Give it a couple of weeks and everyone remembers again, and its all fine (either that or after a couple of weeks all the idiots are either in hospital or without a car)

[factotum]

Modern cars put a lot of buffers between the driver and the road at the best of times. Between automatic transmission and fuel injection and active suspension and traction control and ABS, a lot of the feeling has gone out of driving.

Not sure what fuel injection has to do with the "feeling" of driving? All fuel injection does is make the engine more powerful. Also, automatic transmissions are still quite uncommon in European countries, whereas in the US they've been more or less standard fit for decades, so again I'm not sure how that's something that's changed in modern cars.

It's worth noting that traction control and ABS are actually largely useless in the snow. If the driving wheels have almost no grip at all then the traction control won't be able to drop the power output low enough to prevent them spinning, especially if you're driving a manual car where you can't have any "slip" between the engine revs and the wheels. As for ABS, you'll stop quicker in deep snow if your wheels lock up and get a nice pile of snow in front of them, so the ABS is actively working against you in that situation.

[farothel]

I think a lot depends on location. In places where it snows a lot every year, you have a short adjustment period and then you are fine. In places with only occasional snow (like where I live) it's a big mess every time there is some snow. Also a lot of people in SUVs think because they have all wheel drive that the laws of physics don't apply to them.

And then there are the cars. Again, depending on the location special winter tires and even snow chains are mandatory, making it easier and safer to drive. Where I live we don't have to have winter tires, although I always have (no chains though, those are actually forbidden here and not really needed). And as factotum said, certain cars are better than others. Especially rear wheel drive cars are terrible in snow. You want a low center of gravity and winter tires with still enough profile on them and then drive carefully.

[thorgrim29]

As for ABS, you'll stop quicker in deep snow if your wheels lock up and get a nice pile of snow in front of them, so the ABS is actively working against you in that situation.

If you're driving in fresh snow sure but that hardly ever happens. When you're driving on ice or packed snow ABS works extremely well, you stop faster and stay straight.

[Starwulf]

Dude, seriously, that's not a thing. I was alive a long time before the proliferation of electronic devices and no one ever used long road trips as ersatz driving lessons. Mostly you napped, or read, or annoyed your sibling(s). And I would gather that any attempts to try to use a road trip as such would have been ignored as much then as they would be now.

I've seen a lot of things blamed on 'the kids and their newfangled devices' but that one is... new.

If age is a factor, then an aging population is probably just as much to blame as a younger one. If not more. And if electronic devices are causing problems, it's because adults are looking at them and not driving. Distracted driving cause more accidents than anything else by a large margin.

What you're seeing, OP, is probably/mostly Confirmation Bias.

I do this all the time. I've talked to both my daughters about things to be careful about when driving since they were young, and have continued to do so. And all the parents I know do the same. Maybe it's a rural vs city thing? Or a regional thing? But yeah, my parents talked to me driving while on road trips, and I've talked to my children, and they've both said they'll do the same with their children.

[Aedilred]

Yep. I'm a millennial, so we're definitely not young. The generation after us, who are just now getting driver's licenses and going to university, are most often referred to as Generation Z.

If anyone needs a reason to explain why "the youth" today are disaffected and grumpy, they need look no further than the astonishing laziness applied to naming their generation. Every generation down to Gen X got an adjective (of which some, admittedly, were retrospective). Gen X were defined by X, because they were mysterious, and cool, and X-treem. After that, the media went "sod it" and just started labelling generations "X+1".

That said, perhaps we should embrace the letter-numbering. The youth of today could start calling themselves "Generation WTF" and refuse to drop it. That'd learn them. Or something.

[Nifft]

1 - More people than ever are driving, as mentioned above.

2 - More people are driving professionally, and they're getting paid by the trip, so more people are currently incentivized to drive faster.

3 - Due to climate change, we see a lot more freeze - melt - freeze - melt than we used to see. That's always been the most dangerous set of conditions -- first snow and spring melt were the most dangerous times, but now they're all we have -- over and over all winter long.

[2D8HP]

...Generation X: Born 1965-1980 (38-53 years old)...
...Gen X were defined by X, because they were mysterious, and cool, and X-treem....


I completely approve of this stereotype :cool:

[leafman]

If you're driving in fresh snow sure but that hardly ever happens. When you're driving on ice or packed snow ABS works extremely well, you stop faster and stay straight.
I can't say I agree with that. We had some snow last week, not more than an inch or two, but enough to make an unsalted road slick. I was going 22-25mph and I was trying to slow to a stop for a red light coming up. Brake pedal full down, ABS chattering, still didn't feel like I was slowing down at all. My back end started to swing out, so I pulled the e-brake. The e-brake pulled me back straight and had me stopped dead on the stop bar for the light. Sometimes that extra allowance of wheel spin while the ABS "pumps" the brakes is not what you need. The wheels being locked up with the e-brake made the front tires find pavement and clear it for the rear tires.

[Jay R]

I noticed this trend, too. But I noticed it in 1977/1978.

So I suspect that there is no real change in overall human stupidity or carelessness, but lots of temporary fluctuations in which people you or I happen to see (or notice) each winter.

[Knaight]

There's also one more hypothesis I'd like to put out there. Even beyond mechanisms that genuinely induce worse driving (e.g. the small fraction of people texting on the road at any given time) there's the matter of risk assessment being partially a function of age. What gets perceived as a close call is largely a function of what you can easily avoid and degree to exaggerate or minimize risk. Getting older tends to mean getting slower reaction times, and also being more prone to exaggerate and less prone to minimize risk.

Thus "that car I easily avoided that never even got within two feet" becomes "I almost got killed by someone driving recklessly, but managed to brake last minute".

[AMFV]

There's also one more hypothesis I'd like to put out there. Even beyond mechanisms that genuinely induce worse driving (e.g. the small fraction of people texting on the road at any given time) there's the matter of risk assessment being partially a function of age. What gets perceived as a close call is largely a function of what you can easily avoid and degree to exaggerate or minimize risk. Getting older tends to mean getting slower reaction times, and also being more prone to exaggerate and less prone to minimize risk.

Thus "that car I easily avoided that never even got within two feet" becomes "I almost got killed by someone driving recklessly, but managed to brake last minute".

It's also worth noting that young people are prone to minimize. So while you might be thinking "the car that I easily avoided that never even got within two feet." Somebody with more experience might be thinking, "that's exactly what happened in that accident where I was almost killed and my car was totaled." Cause when you're moving at 60 MPH, 2 feet isn't very far at all.

[Knaight]

It's also worth noting that young people are prone to minimize. So while you might be thinking "the car that I easily avoided that never even got within two feet." Somebody with more experience might be thinking, "that's exactly what happened in that accident where I was almost killed and my car was totaled." Cause when you're moving at 60 MPH, 2 feet isn't very far at all.

That would be why I literally said that "getting older tends to mean...being...less prone to minimize risk", yes. Perceptually that works out to the same general mechanism however.

[lunaticfringe]

I noticed this trend, too. But I noticed it in 1977/1978.

So I suspect that there is no real change in overall human stupidity or carelessness, but lots of temporary fluctuations in which people you or I happen to see (or notice) each winter.

I like this one, you win the thread.:smallbiggrin:

[Algeh]

On younger people/older people: Some people can learn well from descriptions and examples, other people need to try things themselves to learn. Some people need to try things lots of times to learn.

The people who can figure out why you don't want to drive too fast in the snow using descriptions and examples will probably drive slowly in the snow their entire lives. The people who need to try it once or twice probably wrecked or narrowly avoided wrecking a car when they were younger and will remember that next time. The ones who haven't figured it out after multiple tries probably aren't going to become older people who drive cars regularly for a variety of reasons.

Where you're at on this journey of learning also affects how you see other people's driving.

Also, I think most people get more skittish with each accident they get in. I am currently overly paranoid that people will make right-turns-on-red into my car when I'm proceeding straight through a green light, because that happened to me a few months ago. It hadn't really occurred to me to worry about cars stopped at red lights deciding to suddenly accelerate and run into me as a major source of problems before, but it's on the list now. (That driver was a teenager who had already gotten into another accident in his own car and was now driving his mother's car. He may be one of the "many tries" people.)

[paddyfool]

I suspect many of the drivers who crash in snow may have been getting away with dangerous behaviours for a while in better conditions that suddenly prove fatal in bad conditions. Tailgaters, reckless overtakers, and other overly aggressive drivers. Drink drivers, texting drivers, overtired drivers and other self-sabotaging drivers. New, inexperienced drivers and ancient doddery drivers. Etc.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Yup. And as mentioned, it gets worse the more the safety systems protect them from themselves and keep them from learning certain things are really bad ideas.

[Brother Oni]

Yup. And as mentioned, it gets worse the more the safety systems protect them from themselves and keep them from learning certain things are really bad ideas.

I once heard a (possibly apocryphal) anecdote from a driving instructor about a brand new driver who failed to turn the car for a corner and ended up driving into a farmer's gate (and only that because the instructor grabbed the wheel at the last moment and kept the car from overturning into the ditch).

The justification? "This car has power steering, doesn't it? That means it turns for you, right?" :smallsigh:

[Rockphed]

Yup. And as mentioned, it gets worse the more the safety systems protect them from themselves and keep them from learning certain things are really bad ideas.

I have heard that immediately after the introduction of a safety feature the rate of accidents goes down, but then the rate steadily rises to about the same level as before.

[paddyfool]

I have heard that immediately after the introduction of a safety feature the rate of accidents goes down, but then the rate steadily rises to about the same level as before.

Risk compensation is certainly a thing. When seatbelts for passengers etc became mandatory in the UK in the 1980s, deaths among car passengers dropped a bit, but deaths among pedestrians and cyclists went up, because people drove faster.

I think the big negative change lately has been the rise in distracted driving, with widespread mobile phone addiction etc.

One thing I would query about US accident rates - why are road fatalities per capita nearly twice as common in the USA as in neighbouring Canada? (11 per 100,000 people vs 6 per 100,000 people). It seems that within the USA there's a massive spread as well, from 5 per 100k in Massachussetts to 20 per 100k in Mississippi and 25 per 100k in Wyoming. So what's up with Wyoming?

[Telonius]

Risk compensation is certainly a thing. When seatbelts for passengers etc became mandatory in the UK in the 1980s, deaths among car passengers dropped a bit, but deaths among pedestrians and cyclists went up, because people drove faster.

I think the big negative change lately has been the rise in distracted driving, with widespread mobile phone addiction etc.

One thing I would query about US accident rates - why are road fatalities per capita nearly twice as common in the USA as in neighbouring Canada? (11 per 100,000 people vs 6 per 100,000 people). It seems that within the USA there's a massive spread as well, from 5 per 100k in Massachussetts to 20 per 100k in Mississippi and 25 per 100k in Wyoming. So what's up with Wyoming?

I'd suspect that's an urban vs. rural thing. Massachusetts is very densely populated; Wyoming has the second-lowest population density in the US, with only Alaska having fewer people per square mile. In a city (with tons of gridlock, and often lower speed limits) you don't have as much opportunity to get up to high speeds. Not that cities never have deadly car crashes, but if most of your driving is spent going 65mph plus, that's going to a higher risk.

EDIT: I'd have to spend a lot more time looking at this than I have available at the moment, but that rural/urban divide might be the difference between the US and Canada as well. From what I understand, most of Canada's population is fairly urbanized. So while you might have a province that has a pretty low population density overall, that's because you have a whole bunch of people in the city center and almost nobody living in the countryside. It's more like Alaska in that respect. For the contiguous states, the settlement patterns were completely different.

[Rogar Demonblud]

There's the additional complication that rural places are much further from help, once someone notices you are in trouble. Many of our fatalities are people overdriving road conditions (easy to do with cruise control), rolling the car into the ditch and then sitting there in an upside-down car for a few hours (or more--one driver apparently had an accident on the way home Friday night, but wasn't found until someone was going to work Monday morning). The Golden Hour for trauma evaporates in such circumstances.

[thorgrim29]

Regulations related to public safety are in general much looser in the USA than in Canada too, and are going to vary wildly state to state.

[Tyndmyr]

So I've noticed a trend of idiots flooring their vehicles and generally driving too fast in icy conditions over the last 2/3 winters. They predictably fishtail and dangerously swerve around for a bit before crashing or straightening out.

Am I just getting old? Has anyone else noticed this? Are we not properly passing information on to our youth? Do young people refuse to listen to anything not gleaned from a YouTube video?

Car accident deaths are, in general, on the decline. Thus, I'd lean towards it being simply that you are noticing the terrible driving more. It might be related to locale. MD, for instance, doesn't get a ton of snow, but it does happen occasionally. Thus, whenever we do get snow, there's always intense traffic, coupled with inexperience with snow driving. Accidents are numerous. Areas with lots of snow get the practice out of the way early, and are usually good for the rest of the year, and particularly warm areas just don't get snow. It's that midrange that seems to have most of the hangups.

[Vinyadan]

Don't forget drugs and alcohol.

[Peelee]

Don't forget drugs and alcohol.

That sounds like general life advice.

[AMFV]

Yup. And as mentioned, it gets worse the more the safety systems protect them from themselves and keep them from learning certain things are really bad ideas.

Well considering that "learning" in this case is often fatal, maybe it's a good idea that we're avoiding those set of protections. This is the same BS line that people use when they're trying to tell people not to wear fall protection. "If you wear fall protection you'll never really learn how to deal with the heights." But since there (and here) the cost of not having the safety measures is often death...


I'd suspect that's an urban vs. rural thing. Massachusetts is very densely populated; Wyoming has the second-lowest population density in the US, with only Alaska having fewer people per square mile. In a city (with tons of gridlock, and often lower speed limits) you don't have as much opportunity to get up to high speeds. Not that cities never have deadly car crashes, but if most of your driving is spent going 65mph plus, that's going to a higher risk.

EDIT: I'd have to spend a lot more time looking at this than I have available at the moment, but that rural/urban divide might be the difference between the US and Canada as well. From what I understand, most of Canada's population is fairly urbanized. So while you might have a province that has a pretty low population density overall, that's because you have a whole bunch of people in the city center and almost nobody living in the countryside. It's more like Alaska in that respect. For the contiguous states, the settlement patterns were completely different.

The big difference I would guess is that in the US rural people have to drive significant distances to get anywhere, more miles driving makes more accidents pretty much based on the law of averages.

[paddyfool]

Hm. I looked up the stats, and 82% of Canada's population is urbanised, vs 80.7% in the USA. I don't think that can be it. Nor does driving distance fit, since the same applies in both countries.

[Vinyadan]

Hm. I looked up the stats, and 82% of Canada's population is urbanised, vs 80.7% in the USA. I don't think that can be it. Nor does driving distance fit, since the same applies in both countries.

Lots of people in the US, it's easier to hit another car.

[AMFV]

Hm. I looked up the stats, and 82% of Canada's population is urbanised, vs 80.7% in the USA. I don't think that can be it. Nor does driving distance fit, since the same applies in both countries.

Well I'm not sure the driving distance applies in both countries. Canada is a LOT more spread out than most of the US is. So people aren't going to be driving to the nearest city to buy a flatscreen as regularly as people in the US would.

[Rogar Demonblud]

But since there (and here) the cost of not having the safety measures is often death...

Dude, if rear end collisions from tailgating are often fatal where you live, remind me to never go near a vehicle there. Ditto sideswiping a parked car because you're too busy screwing with your phone to keep in your lane.

[Knaight]

Lots of people in the US, it's easier to hit another car.
If anything that would be a function of population density - and the US is pretty urbanized, which shows up in collision statistics. Deaths though? Those don't track well with population density.


One thing I would query about US accident rates - why are road fatalities per capita nearly twice as common in the USA as in neighbouring Canada? (11 per 100,000 people vs 6 per 100,000 people). It seems that within the USA there's a massive spread as well, from 5 per 100k in Massachussetts to 20 per 100k in Mississippi and 25 per 100k in Wyoming. So what's up with Wyoming?
Wyoming is a very empty state with a lot of fairly straight highways, and based on what I've seen on the roads working events there (and just generally being a passenger) suggests that this is mostly a matter of speed. One state south, in Colorado, you might get people going 80 mph on major highways routinely, at least when they're not jammed. Wyoming? Highways go right through towns, and people blow through those town sections at 105, 110, even 120 pretty routinely. Wyoming is the sort of state where if you drive through it at 110 for an extended period you will still have people passing you every so often. If you drive at 75, which is the posted speed limit for most of the state you'll see not that many more people passing you on a per time basis.

[AMFV]

Dude, if rear end collisions from tailgating are often fatal where you live, remind me to never go near a vehicle there. Ditto sideswiping a parked car because you're too busy screwing with your phone to keep in your lane.

Rear end collisions are often fatal because they lead to pileups, bud. A semi-truck that gets into a rear end collision because of a pileup is very likely to be fatal. Also if you'll sideswipe a parked car, you realize you could also sideswipe a pedestrian, no?

[Honest Tiefling]

If anything that would be a function of population density - and the US is pretty urbanized, which shows up in collision statistics. Deaths though? Those don't track well with population density.

Commute distance and the usage of public transportation would also be factors, I think. If you don't want to use the bus because you'll encounter someone trying to sell you drugs, well, you're probably going to not take the bus as often.

Different provinces and states likely have different rules about elderly drivers, which is becoming a larger and larger problem.

[Xyril]

So I've noticed a trend of idiots flooring their vehicles and generally driving too fast in icy conditions over the last 2/3 winters. They predictably fishtail and dangerously swerve around for a bit before crashing or straightening out.

Am I just getting old? Has anyone else noticed this? Are we not properly passing information on to our youth? Do young people refuse to listen to anything not gleaned from a YouTube video?

On the short term, maybe it's just you noticing more. More long term, maybe it follows the trend of people in general being more mobile over the course of their lives? I can imagine that when more people continued to live where they grew up, they would have had most of their lives to adapt to specific driving conditions, and most likely the benefit of driving instructors who had similar experiences and specifically taught them how to deal with dangerous local conditions. With people often moving for college and careers, you probably have a lot of folks who grew up where it never snowed and thus learned literally nothing about how to safely drive in snow--these folks move somewhere like New York or Boston, and you get a bunch of young adults who have become accustomed to knowing everything they need to know about driving suddenly facing a huge gap in their skill set. It's probably not just snow: I grew up somewhere very rainy, and my parents taught me a ton about things like hydroplaning before I even tried driving on a rainy day. Someone growing up where it rarely rained probably wouldn't have had so much emphasis on rainy-day safety, and if we had a lot of people growing in places where it literally never rained, I imagine we'd also be talking about the rise of idiots who can't drive in the rain.

[Lemmy]

I'm definitely not losing the ability to drive in the snow... Because I never had it in the first place.
I have driving licences in 3 separate countries... And I suck at driving in all of them! :smallbiggrin:

[paddyfool]

Rear end collisions are often fatal because they lead to pileups, bud. A semi-truck that gets into a rear end collision because of a pileup is very likely to be fatal.

This. Tailgating is a pernicious menace; here in the UK, it's the third most common contributing factor in serious collisions, and implicated in 1 in 8 road casualties. Stay safe, stay back.



Also if you'll sideswipe a parked car, you realize you could also sideswipe a pedestrian, no?

This too.

[Phhase]

So I've noticed a trend of idiots flooring their vehicles and generally driving too fast in icy conditions over the last 2/3 winters. They predictably fishtail and dangerously swerve around for a bit before crashing or straightening out.

Am I just getting old? Has anyone else noticed this? Are we not properly passing information on to our youth? Do young people refuse to listen to anything not gleaned from a YouTube video?

I haven't noticed. Then again, I live in a fairly icebound state. I think it may be the fact that the ice is spreading thicker, farther, and quicker than ever before, and people are less prepared.