Exactly. We focus on the wrong thing, the design of the car, instead of actual effective policy: allow people to get around without being exposed to car traffic. And when there is car traffic, greatly reducing the possibility for interaction.
However, this is quite difficult when nearly all planning in the US puts its top priority as maximum traffic capacity and speed.
If there's a dangerous intersection that needs to be fixed, but that fix reduces car speeds, traffic engineers will demand that they need to see a certain amount of death or injury before they will act. They won't phrase it that way, buts it's equivalent. As long as the intersection fits the numbers that are in a book somewhere it's A-OK until the book has been proven wrong, which it is again and again, as shown in our traffic deaths.
However, this is quite difficult when nearly all planning in the US puts its top priority as maximum traffic capacity and speed.
If there's a dangerous intersection that needs to be fixed, but that fix reduces car speeds, traffic engineers will demand that they need to see a certain amount of death or injury before they will act. They won't phrase it that way, buts it's equivalent. As long as the intersection fits the numbers that are in a book somewhere it's A-OK until the book has been proven wrong, which it is again and again, as shown in our traffic deaths.