PDA

View Full Version : Do you think the usage of public transport will reduce the risk of accidents?



GirlNextDoor15
27-11-2011, 12:35 PM
Saw this interesting question on a bus a few weeks ago. Pretty weird, huh?
But yeah. Will usage of public transport reduce the risk of accidents?
I'll not be listing out the PROs and CONs because I cba to do that now.;)

GommeInc
27-11-2011, 08:32 PM
I'd assume it would. Less road accidents at least, due to the lack of cars. Unfortunately bus adverts don't list why people would prefer an increase risk of road accidents and that's reliability of the service - people would rather risk death than be on a bus :P

Suspective
27-11-2011, 08:34 PM
Yes, it probably would. More people on buses = less cars on the road which in turn means there is less congestion and traffic problems. Which means people won't be rushing everywhere, and more importantly there is less cars and vehiclesto cause collisions.

A good idea for a debate none the less. :P

Recursion
28-11-2011, 12:23 PM
Yes it would. But hardly anyone is going to ditch their car for a bus or train... for example, for my dad to commute to work on a train he'd have to get up at 5am as opposed to 8am, get a bus to the station, get a train into London and then get a train back out of London into Hertfordshire, AND THEN get a bus. Around a 3 hour commute time, when it could be 45 minutes in the comfort of his own car.

theskyisblue
29-11-2011, 12:30 AM
I do think it would be a good idea. Less traffic will be on the road meaning less road accidents and safer for children to walk to school in the mornings. However if they didnt produce enough buses they would be over crowded and people would get sick of them and get their own cars. However there is different types (bus,train ect)

Rainbow
29-11-2011, 01:00 AM
I think it would to be honest lesser people driving and less traffic and wont cause as much accidents, although I find it quite scary been on a bus since they're no seat belts and in winter when the roads are icy the buses always go flying and turning everywhere where I live:(

Andy
30-11-2011, 11:31 PM
it would to a certain extent, but public transport is over-crowded as it is.. if more people were to use it, they'd need to increase services and make it alot safer for us all :)

Camy
01-12-2011, 03:42 PM
It sounds like a good idea, but buses and trains are far too unreliable and overcrowded as it is.
Never mind the fact all bus drivers, in my area anyway, seem to drive like lunatics.

TheCasualSpy
01-12-2011, 07:30 PM
Less cars on the road means more room so they would have more room on the road to avoid accedents. But if it were to crash it would effect a lot more people

.:iRawr:.
02-12-2011, 09:11 AM
Honestly, we should all just ride quad-bikes it'd be awesome :D

MrMonkeyDeamon
06-12-2011, 08:06 AM
Honestly, we should all just ride quad-bikes it'd be awesome :D

this!!!

__________________________________________________ _____________________________________________

public transport would reduce risk of accidents
BUT
they would have to be more express public transportation

triston220
07-12-2011, 06:38 PM
In theory, yes. Less vehicles on the road = less chance of collision.

GeorginaxD
08-12-2011, 10:34 PM
Yes, in theory it sounds like everyone using public transport instead of cars would work, but it really wouldn't.
The number of buses / etc would have to rise to meet demand, buses in some areas would be over crowded and in others empty. Prices would rise, waiting times etc.

Sharon
09-12-2011, 06:21 PM
some of the drivers around here drive like 50 on normal roads and cross red lights like 10 secs after so no

dbgtz
09-12-2011, 09:03 PM
Depends on the extent I suppose, if everyone used some form of public transport to get everywhere then probably, but then it would become very overcrowded on busses and trains so either they'd need to put in more rails (which I'm sure many people would campaign against), the high speed rails so it can do journeys quicker or alternate transport being promoted. I mean personally all I hear of is busses and trains, but coaches could be promoted for example. However it would make more sense if people would ride bikes/walk. Well make sense for those whos destination is near.

Reestv
11-12-2011, 02:11 PM
There would be a 30% chance of incidents still. Say if everyone took public transport, we'd be paying thousands each year to take the bus (because there would have to be a load more transport vehicles). So the probability of a crash is still near-enough the same, just a bit less.

~ Reestv

Accipiter
11-12-2011, 02:14 PM
I think it would to be honest lesser people driving and less traffic and wont cause as much accidents, although I find it quite scary been on a bus since they're no seat belts and in winter when the roads are icy the buses always go flying and turning everywhere where I live:(

Thats fine in my area because thebusescan hardly reach 30mph even when they're going downhill

:odey:
11-12-2011, 05:26 PM
My lord if I imagine all the public transport drivers in my area tripled, it would cause a lot more havoc than normal.

And it depends what you mean by 'accidents',

If you crashed a car, you might only injure maybe 1, or 2 people etc, but it only takes one severe bus crash to injure 50... So really...

Mark
14-12-2011, 08:07 PM
If you think about it logically, yes it would! Purely because it's less people on the road and more people being driven by a more experienced driver. In terms of suitability, it doesn't suit our lifestyle anymore. People nowadays have more disposable income to spend on leisurely activities and just general fun things to do therefore public transport may not be flexible enough to suit people's lifestyle.

JerseySafety
16-12-2011, 04:34 AM
Yes it would, but a lot of people cba waiting for public transport - especially if you need to get to say a meeting and the train comes late.

FiftyCal
16-12-2011, 03:13 PM
Maybe if you got all the "Accident" prone people riding public transportation maybe, but other than that no.

the.games
22-12-2011, 09:30 PM
I think that it would be safer to an extent, but a bus driver ran into our car last year (their fault, not ours) so, I would say that bus drivers shouldreceivebetter training, etc. to deal with situations on the buses and hazardous driving conditions.

Smurfed-
22-12-2011, 11:03 PM
I was actually on a bus the other day that drove into a car. I also see buses go through red lights. so maybe they could get retested every once and a while.

MizzBex
23-12-2011, 12:23 AM
I think it probably would however there's always the thought that less cars might encourage those the drive faster.. I also find that in some places as people get off a bus they walk out behind the bus to cross the road, without being able to see cars coming the other way - this could cause accidents. Although overall I think accidents would be reduced.

Empired
24-12-2011, 11:21 AM
I assume so, but I don't think people will want to stop using their cars, tbh.. Unless they have to, due to money issues and petrol prices. :(

GoldenMerc
26-12-2011, 04:38 PM
In a way, but surely it would slow down the the world pretty much

Bango124
28-12-2011, 08:40 PM
In Luton, the buses tend to be more dangerous than a bullet to a head. Yet, they have painted one purple to 'Back the Luton City Status bid'. http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/52959000/jpg/_52959166_52959165.jpg

dbgtz
29-12-2011, 07:01 PM
In a way, but surely it would slow down the the world pretty much

I wouldn't think it would have a huge affect, I mean the demand would then be so huge there would be busses a lot more frequently and many more routes. It means people will need to get up earlier to get to places they need to be.

Richie
01-01-2012, 08:17 AM
Yeah it would. Public transport drivers aren't in a hurry to get anywhere, they're just doing their job whereas the public are also rushing. Public transport drivers are professionals and good at what they do, the only public transport crash i can actually remember over here was when the luas crashed into a bus, but that was when the luas only started up.

Cerys
01-01-2012, 12:59 PM
Tbh It would in a way.
But because if the e.g bus had an accident, more people would be injured, that would make it seem that the accident is larger due to more deaths/injuries.

Aladdin
01-01-2012, 01:17 PM
yeh i suppose so but i wouldnt want to

Grig
01-01-2012, 06:12 PM
Nope, and I have evidence. Statistically here, public transport is involved in more accidents- the reasons for which I don't know. It is more reckless driving and the fact that drivers can often be tired and what not.

The only thing public transport does is reduce the number of cars on the road.

iFlame
03-01-2012, 04:01 AM
I don't think it would, the reason being because if you get off a bus and go into the road, you can still get run over? Just because you got on a bus or something does not mean to say your not going to crash, or get run over?

My answer therefore, is no.

ShaunDreclin
09-01-2012, 01:22 AM
If EVERYONE was using public transit it would work, but that will never happen. As it's been said before, its just not feasible for a lot of people. Just yesterday I had to get across the city and it took TWO HOURS on the bus. I got a car ride home, it took 20 minutes. That right there says enough about how useless public transit can be.

auffant1
02-02-2012, 10:37 PM
In ways I feel public transportation can be helpful and dangerous. If you don't have a car or simply need a ride somewhere local then a bus is great. But you also have the factor of danger. Now riding a bus may not seem dangerous but who knows. A crazy man looking for some death could get on the bus :P. But how many times does that happen? Also what if the whole bus crashes? Now I have never heard of that happening, but who knows, more people on the bus more chance of crashing because of distraction. Overall I don't think buses really rededuce the amount of accidents since not a whole lot of people ride them.

Empired
03-02-2012, 02:07 AM
In one way yes: there are less cars on the road and the drivers of buses, etc have to drive for a living, so they are naturally more careful.

However there are many more accidents when letting people people off of buses onto a busy main road. There have been countless accidents involving school children getting off a bus onto a road with no pavement and never quite making it to school..

So yes, I should think it will reduce in some areas, but it will be replenished by other areas.. I don't think road accidents can ever be stopped, though..

Gibs960
03-02-2012, 05:33 PM
Depends on what public transport in my opinion, if they're using buses then no. If they're using trains, yes. However just because people use public transport doesn't mean they'll sell their cars or not buy one all together. Personally I think public transport is just becoming more and more expensive as time goes buy but the government expect people to pay that just to go a 5 minute journey.

Mr-Trainor
03-02-2012, 08:46 PM
In ways I feel public transportation can be helpful and dangerous. If you don't have a car or simply need a ride somewhere local then a bus is great. But you also have the factor of danger. Now riding a bus may not seem dangerous but who knows. A crazy man looking for some death could get on the bus :P. But how many times does that happen? Also what if the whole bus crashes? Now I have never heard of that happening, but who knows, more people on the bus more chance of crashing because of distraction. Overall I don't think buses really rededuce the amount of accidents since not a whole lot of people ride them.
I think it depends where you are as to whether buses are packed or not. Where I live there's about 9 bus routes within 10 minutes walk from where I am, and the majority of the time they're always packed :P.

Depends on what public transport in my opinion, if they're using buses then no. If they're using trains, yes. However just because people use public transport doesn't mean they'll sell their cars or not buy one all together. Personally I think public transport is just becoming more and more expensive as time goes buy but the government expect people to pay that just to go a 5 minute journey.
I agree that it can seem a bit expensive at times. I get free bus travel atm though so I'm fine :P!

auffant1
03-02-2012, 08:54 PM
I think it depends where you are as to whether buses are packed or not. Where I live there's about 9 bus routes within 10 minutes walk from where I am, and the majority of the time they're always packed :P.

Exactly.

Gibs960
03-02-2012, 10:37 PM
For some reason there are a lot of buses round where I live and because I live in a small village you seem to notice them more because on every street there seems to be a bus. However the nearest train station is about 15-20 minutes away and only travels to a few places, the better one is about 30 minutes away.

DJROCKSTAR.
05-02-2012, 08:42 PM
No using public transport will never stop accidents but i think if everyone scrapped cars for a week and had to use a peddle bike we would notice a huge difference.

jasey
05-02-2012, 09:01 PM
I think it sounds like a nice idea on paper but I can't imagine actually having to ride on a bus much!

MotorStefan95
06-02-2012, 03:21 PM
I don't think that public transport would reduce the amount of accidents. The majority of people use cars to travel anyway and accidents are normally caused by them. If more people used public transport then the amount of accidents might decrease but thisdefinitivelywon't stop accidents.

When I was going to school today, my bus nearly crashed into a truck. It was mainly because of the size of the road and the very bad condition of the road (big potholes). This is a main road. I think that the conditions of roads should be improved to reduce the amount of accidents with bigger vehicles.

Want to hide these adverts? Register an account for free!