Read on Twitter
Politicians who don't support a goal of zero road deaths should be made to nominate the specific people they think ought tot die in the coming year SHORT THREAD https://twitter.com/fietsprofessor/status/1281216319044624384
You see, I believe that there is an unspoken, implicit assumption in a lot of road safety thinking: "We can't really do anything about motor violence because it'll hurt the economy, but it's kind of okay because crashes happen more or less randomly, so it's at least fair"
Road death is constructed as a lottery, like doomed 18th Century sailors in a lifeboat drawing lots to see who will get eaten. It's seen as grim, but necessary, and so as long as it's fair and everyone has an even chance, we're kind of okay with it.
But but but but. This is a great example of windscreen logic. This kind of driver's-eye thinking completely ignored the systematic inequalities in our streets. People on foot are just far more at risk than people in cars. They have a load more tickets in the lottery
There are other inequalities too. Poorer people are more likely to live where motor traffic is dense and fast, and so if you're poor then again, you've got more tickets in the lottery
So please always be on guard for any decision-maker falling into this lottery trap. They seek fairness, but in doing so, build in deep inequity
