McBTC

The increase apparently chalked up to J-walking in heavily trafficked areas... at night. Pedestrians not wanting to walk to a controlled corner because it's too far away.

SBinNYC

First, You're considering the avoidance of a collision not the effects of the collision.

Here's what the AAA discovered regarding the relationship between impact speed and the probability of pedestrian killed or seriously injured: "Results show that the average risk of severe injury for a pedestrian struck by a vehicle reaches 10% at an impact speed of 16 mph, 25% at 23 mph, 50% at 31 mph, 75% at 39 mph, and 90% at 46 mph. The average risk of death for a pedestrian reaches 10% at an impact speed of 23 mph, 25% at 32 mph, 50% at 42 mph, 75% at 50 mph, and 90% at 58 mph."

Link to abstract which as a link to the full report. https://aaafoundation.org/impact-speed-pedestrians-risk-severe-injury-death/

Second, you're overlooking how speed affects your stopping distance and thus your ability to avoid a collision. I would suggest that stopping distance from when a pedestrian is perceived is a bigger factor than simply the how far away that pedestrian is. Stopping distance varies as the square of the initial speed. Thus, for the same braking rate, the stopping distance is 27% greater traveling at 62 mph vs. 55 mph and 44% greater traveling at 66 vs 55 mph.

LanghamP

The question people ask when a pedestrian is killed is, "was he jaywalking?"

The question people ask when a bicyclist is killed is, "was he wearing a helmet?"

In other words, the question is whether the person killed deserves a Darwin Award. I would argue in the USA, yes, he deserved to die because he did not have an effective right to transport. Most pedestrians killed by autos are the very young or the old, people who have difficulty moving, and hence are usually looking down, and often do not understand the rules governing the long thin ribbons of death bisecting our cities, patrolled 24/7 by insured drivers. Being killed by an driver is the number one accidental killer, regardless if you're in or out of the car. I'm all for public tax policy making these thin ribbons of death ever wider and ever faster. That'll encourage more car drivers.

Humans, as predators, actually have a hard time crossing the street because our eyes are set forward instead of to the side when danger lies. In other words, looking in both directions is hard for the young and old, who must look in the direction of travel. Children especially are prone to this, and are often killed when stepping out on streets by drivers, even on crosswalks that can be safely ignored by insured and protected drivers. Kids being shorter, and SUVs having a flat tall grill, well that's messy business right there.

If your concern is motivating drivers to take utmost care, then just install a spike inside the driver side airbag pointed directly at the driver's heart. I guarantee you that, contrary to initial thought, the number of vehicle deaths would immediately and drastically go down.

Hippiebrian

I think there are a couple things going on here. First off is the distractions of phones and in dash entertainment contraptions. Second off, and I see it every day, people in huge suvs and trucks have absolutely no idea how wide their vehicles are. They buy these giant vehicles then drive them like they are still in their 2 door Celica. I would recommend splitting licenses by class of vehicle (over a certain weight / size should require a special license).