The point of discussion is "what level of responsibility if any do pedestrians bear in these accidents". Your point tries to make a false moral-equivalency with rape and makes the claim "0 responsibility". I argue there is nuance and just like rape, its possible to make it more / less probable with reasonable measures, but beyond that point, it is wrong to blame the victim.

So if you disagree, then address the point: should we consider the effect that pedestrians looking at phones, J-walking or ignoring signals, and listening to music has on safety or _only_ a single factor (drivers)? If you want to actually save lives then I'd argue for examining all reasons pedestrians are being hit by cars (and not resort to moral reasons to avoid even asking the question).

Who's "the victim" here that should not be blamed?

Or, negligence from the driver, as the OP mentioned.

Or, both.

This comparison does not seem tenable.

Cyclists are also completely unaware, it's almost depressing to stop at a red light and just watch swaths of riders zoom past into incoming traffic.

One thing i'd like is diagonal crossings that would force you to look in the traffic direction. But then, most people don't bother to walk 10 meters to use the crossing anyways.

Earbuds or headphones while walking near a motor vehicle road with anything shy of a barrier-separated sidewalk should be illegal.

https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2020/01/27/jaywalking-while-blac...

There is a large difference between people ought not do <> and cops ought to be given the privilege of harassing and imprisoning people who do <>.

It's perfectly possible to wear headphones and use your eyeballs to ensure the path ahead is clear in fact your ears aren't all that useful. I can SEE an oncoming car as much as a mile away if I am hearing a car about to crease me its already too late.

Not listening to music or a podcast seems a reasonable sacrifice to make, in exchange for being within a few feet of multi-ton vehicles at 30+ mph relative velocity.

There are infrastructure issues too, but vehicle size alone is sufficient to explain most of the increase.

Found a study from 2005 - https://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/11/4/232

Light truck (pickups, suvs, vans) accounted for ~30% higher relative risk vs cars.

Surprisingly (to me) motorcycle/pedestrian accidents are three times as likely to result in a fatality.

Personally I think it's mostly related to distracted driving/walking but vehicle type almost certainly plays some role.

My neighbor's Smart Car and Cooper Mini beg to differ. Also, the proliferation of electric cars requires shedding weight in order to get more mileage. Sure, we still have lots of massive SUVs on the road but I would dispute the notion that vehicles overall are getting heavier on average.

> Larger vehicles, such as the popular SUVs and trucks that dominate new car sales, are more dangerous for pedestrians than sedans

Most new car sales are now SUVs and trucks. The share of SUVs and trucks sold is up over the period considered in the article, your neighbor notwithstanding.

https://www.epa.gov/automotive-trends/highlights-automotive-...

Also, VW Golf/Rabbits. Civics. Accords. They're all huge. And they've all got a lot less glass than they use to have. (High beltline, small windows)

Not that long ago you could get a car that was ~2000 lbs. A big car was 2 tons.

I haven't checked the sales numbers, but I see far fewer Smart Cars today compared to even 5 years ago. Also the latest Mini Coopers are massive. Much larger than most normal cars.

Given vehicle size trends, holding all else equal, this is exactly the outcome you would expect.

I don't hold all else equal, because nothing is equal. I contend that pedestrians are more distracted than ever, as are drivers.

The control for the 'bigger cars more death' would be evaluating the death rate of smaller cars.

The headline doesn't say 'accidents' are getting deadlier, it's saying 'roads' are getting deadlier.

> I don't hold all else equal, because nothing is equal.

Well yes, obviously. My point is that the observed outcome is in line with the expected outcome based on the increase in car sizes. But still it's a bit more complicated.

note the following:

> In 2019, 6,301 pedestrians were killed by vehicles on American streets — up 46% from 2010. Over the same timespan, the total for all traffic deaths rose by 5%.

This implies that distracted driving could be partially responsible, but something else is probably going on with pedestrians.

and:

> And in the first half of 2020, while driving was down because of the pandemic, the pedestrian death rate — the number of people struck and killed compared with the number of miles driven — soared by 20%, putting 2020 on track for the largest one-year increase in the death rate ever.

The article goes on to posit the popular theory that increased vehicle speed is the key factor in the last year. In fact a lot of the advocacy around the issue is focused on traffic calming in urban centers which has been shown repeatedly to lower the number of pedestrian deaths.

> The group reported about a third of pedestrians were intoxicated when they were struck