This is for strictly mildly interesting material. If it's too interesting, it doesn't belong. If it's not interesting, it doesn't belong.
This is obviously an objective criteria, so the mods are always right. Or maybe mildly right? Ahh.. what do we know?
Just post some stuff and don't spam.
Taken from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBPkI3CCY8o
Not surprised by SC, as a Canadian I had one accident in 40 years of driving, it was in SC, caused by a 17yo girl driving an old suburban or something.
USA #1! 🇺🇸🦅🇺🇸
Is it the issue of safety standards?
I'm guessing there is some correlation to total miles(/km) driven. Not all of it, but some. If people in one location drive drastically less distance annually, I'd expect their numbers to show drastically lower on the chart, as well.
I am not convinced with Australia and Canada being much better? It would make sense if you were comparing to Europe.
. . . Huh. Here in Vic every year we get targeted with so many ads being like 'worse year ever for road deaths, drive safe, etc'
The fact that California, a state with THIRTEEN TIMES MORE PEOPLE than Mississippi, has less than half the number of traffic fatalities is mind blowing. Mississippi is just 30% of the landmass that California represents, and yet it gets more than double the amount of traffic fatalities.
Looking at the left side of the graph, the trend is easily recognizable. Drunk angry and repressed, poverty stricken republicans will drive drunk like it's the right to bear arms. The further right you go, the more democratic the state.
Chart is incomplete
Every state above 2M
That excludes data. This is a terrible display of statistics as another commentor points out. Totally useless information.
No, it is literally just comparing similarly sized jurisdictions.
Then OP should learn how to put relevant info into the post.
It's in the linked source.
Should be on the graph
How you know this is good data