"Traffic Violence" : The Grifters Go After Cars

I first saw this term on Hacker News. It made me vomit, and of course the defenders gave the usual accusations and evasions:

• You must be in favor of traffic violence.

• Language evolves; get over it.

But no, we already had “traffic accidents,” so “traffic violence” is just an excuse for grifters to grift.

The first one doesn’t even deserve a response. But let’s consider the “language evolves!” defense.

Evolution vs. Selective Breeding

Saying that “traffic violence” is language evolution is like saying that this

is evolution. No, someone deliberately made the Frenchies come out like that. It wasn’t natural selection.

“Traffic Violence” is Newspeak

Here’s an explanation.

Of all the words in the street safety advocate’s vernacular, perhaps the term “traffic violence” provokes the most powerful emotions. For many, that emotion is simple gratitude, that the tens of thousands of preventable deaths that occur in the traffic realm every year have been recognized, in this small way, for the violence that it is. For others, it’s confusion about the connotation of intentional harm that creeps in when we remove the word "accident" from our vocabulary — or even rage that it provokes in people who say we are not presuming innocence of every driver involved in all car crashes by default.

Note the reporting: “that emotion is simple gratitude” comes first. But, “For others, it’s confusion about the connotation of intentional harm that creeps in when we remove the word "accident" from our vocabulary.” [emphasis added]

So you’re not thinking clearly if this term revolts you; you’re “confused.”

Here’s another admission that it’s pure propaganda from “street safety advocates”:

Some street safety advocates have adopted the term "traffic violence" when describing car-related collisions, particularly when a pedestrian or cyclist is injured or killed.

Their basic argument is that longtime use of the word "accident" minimizes the prevalence and seriousness, and creates a perception block about who is responsible when a driver kills someone with their car. The word "accident" suggests nothing could have been done to predict or prevent the collision.

"When you say the word 'accidents', you make it sound like it couldn't have been avoided," said John Yi, who leads the street safety advocacy group Los Angeles Walks. "It's important to really change that kind of vocabulary so people don't get confused and think these things just happen and this is just a cost we pay living... in a society where we use cars." [emphasis added]

Google Trends shows that the term was unheard of until about 2008, then went dormant for a few years, and then picked up without taking off, particularly:

The New York Times in 2023 attempted to gin up outrage over a short-term rise in US traffic deaths, without ever using that propaganda term. Ironically, their data shows a long-term decline:

However, the US has defied a world-wide trend among developed countries and suffered a slight uptick. Reasons are suggested but not proven: greater smartphone use while driving, marijuana legalization, more automatic transmissions in the US. Note, though, that it’s still drastically lower than in 2000.

Grifters

Whenever you see the deliberate introduction of a scare term like “traffic violence” for an old concept like “road accidents” (which has been tracked for decades by multiple agencies, like the OECD), you have to ask, “cui bono?” or “Who’s benefiting from this?”

Maybe some grifters founded 501(c)(3) organizations so they can collect tax-deductible contributions and give themselves jobs? Let’s look at that first quote, from Streetsblog. It says they are part of a nonprofit Open Plans, which files 990 forms with the IRS.

Here are some highlights from their 990 from 2022;

1. Contributions: $236,448. Previous year: $3,167,915

2. Expenses: $2,000,962. Previous year: $1,587,552

3. Compensation, Lisa Orman, COO: $176,166; Lawrence Gersh, $160,430

So, income crashed, but expenses went up.

I asked Charity Navigator for charities on “traffic violence”, and came up empty. However, ChatGPT offered six:

1. Families for Safe Streets (FSS): Founded by people who lost loved ones or were seriously injured in traffic crashes, this organization advocates for policy changes to end traffic violence and provides support to crash survivors and their families.

2. Vision Zero Network: Vision Zero is a global initiative aimed at eliminating all traffic fatalities and severe injuries while increasing safe, healthy, and equitable mobility for all. Many cities worldwide have adopted Vision Zero policies, and local groups advocate for safer streets.

3. RoadPeace: A UK-based charity that supports victims of road crashes and campaigns for safer streets. They offer counseling and legal assistance for those affected by road violence and work on policy changes to reduce road traffic deaths.

4. Transportation Alternatives: This New York City-based nonprofit advocates for safer, more sustainable transportation options and policies, aiming to reduce traffic fatalities and injuries.

5. Bike Law: An advocacy group that focuses on protecting cyclists' rights and providing legal support for those injured in bike crashes.

6. Safe Kids Worldwide: While focused on child safety, Safe Kids has campaigns dedicated to reducing traffic-related injuries and deaths among children, including pedestrian and bike

Families for Safe Streets

The website says “Families for Safe Streets is a project of Transportation Alternatives.” See below.

Vision Zero Network

Their website says they are a project of Community Initiatives, which is a huge charity making grants to dozens or hundreds of other charities. Basically not transparent, then.

RoadPeace

This is a UK-based group so we don’t expect to find an IRS 990 form for them. In this document, they take umbrage at the term “accident”:

This guidance uses the term ‘unintentional injuries’ rather than ‘accidents’, since ‘most injuries and their precipitating events are predictable and preventable’. The term ‘accident’ implies an unpredictable and therefore unavoidable event.

They prefer “crash.” Interestingly, they don’t use the term “traffic violence” anywhere on their site.

OK, you win; we’ll call them “crashes” or “unintentional injuries.” Are we done?

Transportation Alternatives

This one is listed on Charity Navigator. Let’s look at their 2021 990 form on the IRS website.

Here are some highlights:

• $5,804,814 revenue

• $0 grants made

• $2,597,364 salaries & compensation

• $3,489,864 expenses

• 53 employees

• $107,308 compensation to Marco Conner

• $300,408 compensation to Danny Harris

• $113,792 compensation to Christine Hsu

What happened to that $5,804,814 - $3,489,864? They just kept it, apparently.

(If Transportation Alternatives shuts down, Danny doesn’t get to keep the assets. They have to go to another charity.)

Bike Law

This is mostly an organization of lawyers who represent bicyclists. There is a foundation, but it appears to be very small (less than $50,000/year).

I’m not calling this group “grifters.” I’m a bicyclist myself and we need something like that.

Safe Kids Worldwide

This seems to be a fairly large organization dedicated to children injured in traffic crashes. Nothing wrong with that; not “grifters.”

They also don’t use the term “traffic violence” preferring “traffic collisions” or “road safety.”

Conclusions

The two nonprofits I looked at, Transportation Alternatives and Open Plan, are both based in New York, which makes sense: it’s the place where owning a car has the least value. If they simply confined their advocacy to New York City, no one would object.

Forbes said

The New York-Newark-Jersey City metropolitan area of New York and New Jersey reported the lowest rate of car ownership in 2022, with only 69.5% of households having at least one vehicle

Public transportation is relatively good in NYC, unlike most of the country. Interestingly enough, car ownership took off during the pandemic. In 2021,

In Manhattan alone, new car registrations rose 76% and in Brooklyn, registrations climbed 45%.

Being in close proximity to a lot of strangers was less appealing when they might carry COVID.

“Traffic violence” is a term being pushed by some left-wing outlets (NPR, LA Times, The Atlantic) and some self-interested grifter organizations who hate cars. Let’s just reject it.