I imagine if you compared the number of injuries to the distance travelled, or even trips taken, cars would come out way ahead.

In some instances (like suburbs) need for distance is increased by cars.

Sure, but that doesn’t really change the comparison of risks. Escalator rides, for example, are just plain old more dangerous than car rides regardless of why, just as car rides are just plain old more dangerous than train rides.

Of course someone had to bring up cars. You know how many people get striken by reckless cyclists?

More or less people than the ones that get striken by reckless car drivers?

Barely any relative to car accidents.

What is your point?

Feel free to show some comparable statistics.