You Gotta Love BART

http://www.vitalsigns.mtc.ca.gov/fatalities-crashes - 33,000 incidents per year
https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2013/cb13-r22.html - 265,000 people commuting into SF county each day

http://www.sfweekly.com/news/violent-crimes-on-bart-increased-24-percent-in-2017/ - 347 violent crimes, 417 incidents in FY17
https://www.bart.gov/sites/default/files/docs/BARTfactsheet_June17_0.pdf - 70,000 people using BART to commute every day

Comparing just those numbers the rate of incidence per year would be 12% (car) vs .6% (BART).

1 Like

33,000 is total bay area fatalities, so how many people drive per day in the whole bay area? I can’t find a number. It has to be in the millions though.

No, it’s total accidents including minor crashes.

BA Population stats:

2.6M using a car to get to work.

In 2017:

419 violent crimes
3032 property crimes

So that’s

70,000 ridership/3451 crimes = 1 in 20

2.6M driving/33,000 accidents = 1 in 78

I don’t think it’s fair to compare everyone driving to work period in the bay area vs those using a car to commute that would otherwise BART - I don’t think its the comparative population.

and property crimes are not equivalent to a potential injury in a car accident (i.e. your car getting stolen at BART and larcency (items stolen out of car) - so they should not be included - it should be the smaller 419 number I originally quoted.

Why?

I’m going to disagree. Minor accidents can mean no injury and as little as a scraped bumper. I thought it reasonable to include minor things like larceny.

My original argument was based on the fact that people are scared to ride BART / get injured / accosted somehow - and my point was you’re just as likely to get in an accident driving your car. So larcency and auto theft shouldn’t be included here.

1 Like

Can you find stats for only major crashes and in-car (not pedestrian) fatalities then?

Ok how about this, we’ll accept the following:

“In 2016, over 33,000 traffic crashes resulting in fatalities, major injuries or minor injuries were reported on Bay Area roadways. Fortunately, over 90 percent of those crashes resulted in only minor injuries.”

33000*10%=3300 to compare to 419 injuries.

70,000 ridership/419 crimes = 1 in 167

2.6M driving/3300 accidents = 1 in 787

3 Likes

Basically public transportation is dangerous, unpleasant and a big pain…No matter how many Europeans try to shame us, Americans hate public transportation

We are also killed by the pollution including green house emission by auto. Public transport is much greener.

How about we use an even stricter measure like incidents that actually resulted in injuries? Crime on BART may well include people smoking weed which I don’t really care. But if some random car crashed into me I may die.

Side rant: Why do we have to settle for less as Americans? We can’t have good transport like every other developed country plus 3rd world counties like China just because we are Americans? That sounds pretty defeatist. Same with we can’t have affordable healthcare just because we are Americans. We should strive for more not less.

It really depends on the city. Boston’s subway isn’t like BART. More pleasant for sure.

Do you take the Muni or Bart?
I have been on subways in London Paris and Moscow.
Built before cars were dominate… Much harder to build now.

No. They don’t go where I want to go. But I am looking forward to take the HSR. :smile:

:roll_eyes:

Don’t forget that SF is a third world country right now.

Many cities have better public transport than SF/Bay Area. Certainly NYC does. Busses come every 5 minutes.

I’m just miffed that SamTrans doesn’t time the busses to when private and middle schools get out. It’s like the high schools are all they care about, and then people get upset at the rest of the school’s pickup lines.

1 Like

It’s a miracle CA and SF in particular are doing so well despite a barely functional government.