Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue07CivicEX
|
thanks for that Blue,
so here is the dilemma:
We have a biased
pro DRL page with actual and fairly recent studies indicating that more pedestrians are run over
with DRLs on, 16 percent more. And a presumably less significant (and even more bizarre) stat from 30 years ago about slightly less people getting hit with two cars at once.
FYI, Worldwide, 2/3 of people killed in vehicle accidents are pedestrians. According to the AAA,
http://www.aaafoundation.org/pdf/Saf...tureReport.pdf , 1.9 per 100,000 are pedestrians and 15.6 per 100,000 accidents are occupants.
So if the pro DRL data is to be believed then why does it seem like it is at the cost of more pedestrian lives? What the hell was going on in denmark in 1993? I absolutely do not like the idea of mowing down more cageless folks and cannot think of a conclusive reason why DRLs shouldn't be safer, but WTF?
I think we've settled on the 500 million gallons of gas annually figure for running all those DRLs.