Geometrical traffic hazards

On Sunday, May 3, 2020 at 6:27:28 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/3/2020 4:21 AM, wrote:
On Sunday, May 3, 2020 at 5:19:50 AM UTC+2, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:

On 5/2/2020 3:32 AM, wrote:
On Friday, May 1, 2020 at 5:45:12 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/30/2020 11:42 PM, James wrote:
On 1/5/20 11:45 am, Radey Shouman wrote:
Interesting video, and article, on a rural crossroads (intersection) in
England that has been the site of two cycling deaths.Â* Nice, flat,
straight, open roads that intersect at a moderate but not right angle.
One road now has a stop sign (apparently a rarity in the UK), the other
does not.

Motorists, and probably cyclists, although that is not stated, routinely
cruise through the stop sign without slowing down.Â* On several occasions
they have collided with cyclists traveling on the through road.Â* Why?
According to the article, it's mostly a case of "constant bearing,
decreasing range" keeping the cyclist in the motorist's A-pillar blind
spot right up to the point of collision, while the cyclist, feeling
secure in his right of way, would have to look behind him in order to
see the motorist.

https://singletrackworld.com/2018/01...ling-cyclists/


https://youtu.be/SYeeTvitvFU




Great video.

UK insurance has known about the increased risk of wide A pillars for a
long time.

https://www.autonetinsurance.co.uk/about-us/news/insurance-news/2011/09/23/blind-spot-crashes-increase-by-50-over-two-years


Wide A pillars came about to strengthen the roof structure such that car
occupants are better protected in the event of a crash where the car
rolls over.

I have written to the Australian federal member in charge of the
Australian vehicle design rules, complaining that wide A pillars should
fail the "Forward Field of View" requirement.

https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2018L01521

So far the replies have been little more than crickets.

I've been very aware of the visibility problem inherent with thick A
pillars, as well as other visibility problems with modern cars.

A few years ago I finally sold my 1990 Honda station wagon. That car
design got some attention for allowing a driver to spot an egg on the
roadway just a few feet in front of the front bumper. In fact, the hood
slanted so much it was hard to see from the driver's seat. The car's
greenhouse was huge, and the A pillars were slim.

By contrast, I'm constantly craning my neck to look past the A pillar in
our new-ish Mazda. And despite constantly checking windows and mirrors
while backing up and turning at less than 1 mph, I managed to bump into
a post that stayed in my blind spot during the entire backing process.


--
- Frank Krygowski

Modern cars have all kind of sensors and a rear camera. Very helpful..

Our 2014 lacks those electronics. I'd thought about adding an
aftermarket rear camera but didn't do it. Hence the bump.

I still haven't added that camera. I guess I'm an optimist.

I have a backup camera on my 2016 car. It's convenient when backing
into a parking space or parallel parking, but I'm skeptical that it
improves safety.

It improves the safety the same way a rear view mirror does, only better. Mine pops out from above the licence plate when putting the car in reverse and has an almost 180 degrees view, much better then a rear view mirror even when it is dark. I never understood why it took so long before car manufacturers implemented this. Lines are also projected into the image indicating the way of travel depending on the position of the steering wheel and an aid to position your towbar to the trailer. As I said very helpful especially with cars with poor visibility to the rear, like mine.

I've never understood why manufacturers started designing cars with such
terrible rear visibility! Like so many other marketing trends, it's a
triumph of styling over practicality.

--
- Frank Krygowski

I think it has something to do with the safety regulations.

Lou

Frank Krygowski writes:

On 5/3/2020 4:21 AM, wrote:
On Sunday, May 3, 2020 at 5:19:50 AM UTC+2, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:

On 5/2/2020 3:32 AM, wrote:
On Friday, May 1, 2020 at 5:45:12 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/30/2020 11:42 PM, James wrote:
On 1/5/20 11:45 am, Radey Shouman wrote:
Interesting video, and article, on a rural crossroads (intersection) in
England that has been the site of two cycling deaths.Â* Nice, flat,
straight, open roads that intersect at a moderate but not right angle.
One road now has a stop sign (apparently a rarity in the UK), the other
does not.

Motorists, and probably cyclists, although that is not stated, routinely
cruise through the stop sign without slowing down.Â* On several occasions
they have collided with cyclists traveling on the through road.Â* Why?
According to the article, it's mostly a case of "constant bearing,
decreasing range" keeping the cyclist in the motorist's A-pillar blind
spot right up to the point of collision, while the cyclist, feeling
secure in his right of way, would have to look behind him in order to
see the motorist.

https://singletrackworld.com/2018/01...ling-cyclists/


https://youtu.be/SYeeTvitvFU




Great video.

UK insurance has known about the increased risk of wide A pillars for a
long time.

https://www.autonetinsurance.co.uk/about-us/news/insurance-news/2011/09/23/blind-spot-crashes-increase-by-50-over-two-years


Wide A pillars came about to strengthen the roof structure such that car
occupants are better protected in the event of a crash where the car
rolls over.

I have written to the Australian federal member in charge of the
Australian vehicle design rules, complaining that wide A pillars should
fail the "Forward Field of View" requirement.

https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2018L01521

So far the replies have been little more than crickets.

I've been very aware of the visibility problem inherent with thick A
pillars, as well as other visibility problems with modern cars.

A few years ago I finally sold my 1990 Honda station wagon. That car
design got some attention for allowing a driver to spot an egg on the
roadway just a few feet in front of the front bumper. In fact, the hood
slanted so much it was hard to see from the driver's seat. The car's
greenhouse was huge, and the A pillars were slim.

By contrast, I'm constantly craning my neck to look past the A pillar in
our new-ish Mazda. And despite constantly checking windows and mirrors
while backing up and turning at less than 1 mph, I managed to bump into
a post that stayed in my blind spot during the entire backing process.


--
- Frank Krygowski

Modern cars have all kind of sensors and a rear camera. Very helpful.

Our 2014 lacks those electronics. I'd thought about adding an
aftermarket rear camera but didn't do it. Hence the bump.

I still haven't added that camera. I guess I'm an optimist.

I have a backup camera on my 2016 car. It's convenient when backing
into a parking space or parallel parking, but I'm skeptical that it
improves safety.

It improves the safety the same way a rear view mirror does, only
better. Mine pops out from above the licence plate when putting the
car in reverse and has an almost 180 degrees view, much better then
a rear view mirror even when it is dark. I never understood why it
took so long before car manufacturers implemented this. Lines are
also projected into the image indicating the way of travel depending
on the position of the steering wheel and an aid to position your
towbar to the trailer. As I said very helpful especially with cars
with poor visibility to the rear, like mine.

I've never understood why manufacturers started designing cars with
such terrible rear visibility! Like so many other marketing trends,
it's a triumph of styling over practicality.

It's not just styling -- thick pillars are the easiest way of meeting
increasingly strict standards for occupant protection during rollovers.
That's good for drivers and passengers, less good for cyclists and
pedestrians.

On 5/3/2020 1:20 PM, wrote:
On Sunday, May 3, 2020 at 6:27:28 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/3/2020 4:21 AM, wrote:
On Sunday, May 3, 2020 at 5:19:50 AM UTC+2, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:

On 5/2/2020 3:32 AM, wrote:
On Friday, May 1, 2020 at 5:45:12 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/30/2020 11:42 PM, James wrote:
On 1/5/20 11:45 am, Radey Shouman wrote:
Interesting video, and article, on a rural crossroads (intersection) in
England that has been the site of two cycling deaths.Â* Nice, flat,
straight, open roads that intersect at a moderate but not right angle.
One road now has a stop sign (apparently a rarity in the UK), the other
does not.

Motorists, and probably cyclists, although that is not stated, routinely
cruise through the stop sign without slowing down.Â* On several occasions
they have collided with cyclists traveling on the through road.Â* Why?
According to the article, it's mostly a case of "constant bearing,
decreasing range" keeping the cyclist in the motorist's A-pillar blind
spot right up to the point of collision, while the cyclist, feeling
secure in his right of way, would have to look behind him in order to
see the motorist.

https://singletrackworld.com/2018/01...ling-cyclists/


https://youtu.be/SYeeTvitvFU




Great video.

UK insurance has known about the increased risk of wide A pillars for a
long time.

https://www.autonetinsurance.co.uk/about-us/news/insurance-news/2011/09/23/blind-spot-crashes-increase-by-50-over-two-years


Wide A pillars came about to strengthen the roof structure such that car
occupants are better protected in the event of a crash where the car
rolls over.

I have written to the Australian federal member in charge of the
Australian vehicle design rules, complaining that wide A pillars should
fail the "Forward Field of View" requirement.

https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2018L01521

So far the replies have been little more than crickets.

I've been very aware of the visibility problem inherent with thick A
pillars, as well as other visibility problems with modern cars.

A few years ago I finally sold my 1990 Honda station wagon. That car
design got some attention for allowing a driver to spot an egg on the
roadway just a few feet in front of the front bumper. In fact, the hood
slanted so much it was hard to see from the driver's seat. The car's
greenhouse was huge, and the A pillars were slim.

By contrast, I'm constantly craning my neck to look past the A pillar in
our new-ish Mazda. And despite constantly checking windows and mirrors
while backing up and turning at less than 1 mph, I managed to bump into
a post that stayed in my blind spot during the entire backing process.


--
- Frank Krygowski

Modern cars have all kind of sensors and a rear camera. Very helpful.

Our 2014 lacks those electronics. I'd thought about adding an
aftermarket rear camera but didn't do it. Hence the bump.

I still haven't added that camera. I guess I'm an optimist.

I have a backup camera on my 2016 car. It's convenient when backing
into a parking space or parallel parking, but I'm skeptical that it
improves safety.

It improves the safety the same way a rear view mirror does, only better. Mine pops out from above the licence plate when putting the car in reverse and has an almost 180 degrees view, much better then a rear view mirror even when it is dark. I never understood why it took so long before car manufacturers implemented this. Lines are also projected into the image indicating the way of travel depending on the position of the steering wheel and an aid to position your towbar to the trailer. As I said very helpful especially with cars with poor visibility to the rear, like mine.

I've never understood why manufacturers started designing cars with such
terrible rear visibility! Like so many other marketing trends, it's a
triumph of styling over practicality.

--
- Frank Krygowski

I think it has something to do with the safety regulations.

I know it does for the front A pillars. I don't think the rear
visibility problem is due to a safety regulation - at least, not on our
hatchback.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On Sun, 03 May 2020 10:15:44 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/2/2020 9:59 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 3 May 2020 02:38:25 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote:

On Sat, 02 May 2020 00:32:55 -0700, lou.holtman wrote:


Modern cars have all kind of sensors and a rear camera. Very helpful.

IME, these do not overcome a basic inability in the skill of reversing.
Some people just do not have the mental skill to ever reverse anything.

Never volunteer to help with unloading when it involves amateur drivers
reversing to a loading dock.

Well, one probably shouldn't stand between the loading dock and the
rear of the truck with any driver :-)
--
cheers,

John B.


That's one of the primary Rules of Life: 'No good deed goes
unpunished.'

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/l...ylmar/2348604/

The news article itself didn't seem very informative but the reference
to someone who was going to offer some new law to give better
protection said that the guy was pinned between two cars.

I find the attitude that there need to be more laws to prevent people
backing into others, or running over people to be, well, a bit
ludicrous. If you back into some-body/thing it is YOUR fault and all
the whining about "Oh! I couldn't see" is quite simply B.S. Just turn
your head, or if necessary get out of the car and look.... even when
it is raining.
--
cheers,

John B.

On 5/3/2020 5:49 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 03 May 2020 10:15:44 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/2/2020 9:59 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 3 May 2020 02:38:25 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote:

On Sat, 02 May 2020 00:32:55 -0700, lou.holtman wrote:


Modern cars have all kind of sensors and a rear camera. Very helpful.

IME, these do not overcome a basic inability in the skill of reversing.
Some people just do not have the mental skill to ever reverse anything.

Never volunteer to help with unloading when it involves amateur drivers
reversing to a loading dock.

Well, one probably shouldn't stand between the loading dock and the
rear of the truck with any driver :-)
--
cheers,

John B.


That's one of the primary Rules of Life: 'No good deed goes
unpunished.'

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/l...ylmar/2348604/

The news article itself didn't seem very informative but the reference
to someone who was going to offer some new law to give better
protection said that the guy was pinned between two cars.

I find the attitude that there need to be more laws to prevent people
backing into others, or running over people to be, well, a bit
ludicrous. If you back into some-body/thing it is YOUR fault and all
the whining about "Oh! I couldn't see" is quite simply B.S. Just turn
your head, or if necessary get out of the car and look.... even when
it is raining.


Yes indeed. Compare to Canada where a nutjob recently killed
22 people, nine of them by bludgeoning/arson, the rest with
firearms illegally smuggled from USA. All those actions are
crimes already.

His Highness Fidel II decided to ban a wide range of
firearms unrelated to the crimes of the instant because
solving problems is work, accepting some small degree of
chaos/anomaly in a free society is sensible but deflection
and punishment of the innocent wins votes.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Sun, 03 May 2020 18:31:31 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/3/2020 5:49 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 03 May 2020 10:15:44 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/2/2020 9:59 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 3 May 2020 02:38:25 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote:

On Sat, 02 May 2020 00:32:55 -0700, lou.holtman wrote:


Modern cars have all kind of sensors and a rear camera. Very helpful.

IME, these do not overcome a basic inability in the skill of reversing.
Some people just do not have the mental skill to ever reverse anything.

Never volunteer to help with unloading when it involves amateur drivers
reversing to a loading dock.

Well, one probably shouldn't stand between the loading dock and the
rear of the truck with any driver :-)
--
cheers,

John B.


That's one of the primary Rules of Life: 'No good deed goes
unpunished.'

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/l...ylmar/2348604/

The news article itself didn't seem very informative but the reference
to someone who was going to offer some new law to give better
protection said that the guy was pinned between two cars.

I find the attitude that there need to be more laws to prevent people
backing into others, or running over people to be, well, a bit
ludicrous. If you back into some-body/thing it is YOUR fault and all
the whining about "Oh! I couldn't see" is quite simply B.S. Just turn
your head, or if necessary get out of the car and look.... even when
it is raining.


Yes indeed. Compare to Canada where a nutjob recently killed
22 people, nine of them by bludgeoning/arson, the rest with
firearms illegally smuggled from USA. All those actions are
crimes already.

His Highness Fidel II decided to ban a wide range of
firearms unrelated to the crimes of the instant because
solving problems is work, accepting some small degree of
chaos/anomaly in a free society is sensible but deflection
and punishment of the innocent wins votes.

I'm not sure who "Fedel II" is but one of the overwhelming attributes
of politicians is to be seen to "be doing something about the problem"
even if the "something" is totally ineffective. When election time
comes a few voters may remember that your solution didn't work but
many will remember that you "took positive action in a timely manner".

Think of ""Ich bin ein Berliner" and the news coverage!

(although a "Berliner" can equally be the name of a sort of jelly
donut :-)
https://tinyurl.com/mfx9kea
--
cheers,

John B.

On 5/3/2020 8:12 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 03 May 2020 18:31:31 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/3/2020 5:49 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 03 May 2020 10:15:44 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/2/2020 9:59 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 3 May 2020 02:38:25 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote:

On Sat, 02 May 2020 00:32:55 -0700, lou.holtman wrote:


Modern cars have all kind of sensors and a rear camera. Very helpful.

IME, these do not overcome a basic inability in the skill of reversing.
Some people just do not have the mental skill to ever reverse anything.

Never volunteer to help with unloading when it involves amateur drivers
reversing to a loading dock.

Well, one probably shouldn't stand between the loading dock and the
rear of the truck with any driver :-)
--
cheers,

John B.


That's one of the primary Rules of Life: 'No good deed goes
unpunished.'

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/l...ylmar/2348604/

The news article itself didn't seem very informative but the reference
to someone who was going to offer some new law to give better
protection said that the guy was pinned between two cars.

I find the attitude that there need to be more laws to prevent people
backing into others, or running over people to be, well, a bit
ludicrous. If you back into some-body/thing it is YOUR fault and all
the whining about "Oh! I couldn't see" is quite simply B.S. Just turn
your head, or if necessary get out of the car and look.... even when
it is raining.


Yes indeed. Compare to Canada where a nutjob recently killed
22 people, nine of them by bludgeoning/arson, the rest with
firearms illegally smuggled from USA. All those actions are
crimes already.

His Highness Fidel II decided to ban a wide range of
firearms unrelated to the crimes of the instant because
solving problems is work, accepting some small degree of
chaos/anomaly in a free society is sensible but deflection
and punishment of the innocent wins votes.

I'm not sure who "Fedel II" is but one of the overwhelming attributes
of politicians is to be seen to "be doing something about the problem"
even if the "something" is totally ineffective. When election time
comes a few voters may remember that your solution didn't work but
many will remember that you "took positive action in a timely manner".

Think of ""Ich bin ein Berliner" and the news coverage!

(although a "Berliner" can equally be the name of a sort of jelly
donut :-)
https://tinyurl.com/mfx9kea
--
cheers,

John B.


I've been told by German speakers that it could be heard as
a pun but wasn't in context.


--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 5/3/2020 7:31 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 5/3/2020 5:49 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 03 May 2020 10:15:44 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/2/2020 9:59 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 3 May 2020 02:38:25 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote:

On Sat, 02 May 2020 00:32:55 -0700, lou.holtman wrote:


Modern cars have all kind of sensors and a rear camera. Very helpful.

IME, these do not overcome a basic inability in the skill of
reversing.
Some people just do not have the mental skill to ever reverse
anything.

Never volunteer to help with unloading when it involves amateur
drivers
reversing to a loading dock.

Well, one probably shouldn't stand between the loading dock and the
rear of the truck with any driver :-)
--
cheers,

John B.


That's one of the primary Rules of Life: 'No good deed goes
unpunished.'

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/l...ylmar/2348604/


The news article itself didn't seem very informative but the reference
to someone who was going to offer some new law to give better
protection said that the guy was pinned between two cars.

I find the attitude that there need to be more laws to prevent people
backing into others, or running over people to be, well, a bit
ludicrous. If you back into some-body/thing it is YOUR fault and all
the whining about "Oh! I couldn't see" is quite simply B.S. Just turn
your head, or if necessary get out of the car and look.... even when
it is raining.


Yes indeed. Compare to Canada where a nutjob recently killed 22 people,
nine of them by bludgeoning/arson, the rest with firearms illegally
smuggled from USA. All those actions are crimes already.

His Highness Fidel II decided to ban a wide range of firearms unrelated
to the crimes of the instant because solving problems is work, accepting
some small degree of chaos/anomaly in a free society is sensible but
deflection and punishment of the innocent wins votes.

I guess we'll see how well the Canadians survive without guns with
special features intended to facilitate mass killings.

So far, Australia seems to be getting along pretty well. New Zealand
too. Most of Europe has never had the problem in the first place.

But admittedly, none of those are a short walk from the gun-craziest
major country.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On Sun, 03 May 2020 20:55:05 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/3/2020 8:12 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 03 May 2020 18:31:31 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/3/2020 5:49 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 03 May 2020 10:15:44 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/2/2020 9:59 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 3 May 2020 02:38:25 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote:

On Sat, 02 May 2020 00:32:55 -0700, lou.holtman wrote:


Modern cars have all kind of sensors and a rear camera. Very helpful.

IME, these do not overcome a basic inability in the skill of reversing.
Some people just do not have the mental skill to ever reverse anything.

Never volunteer to help with unloading when it involves amateur drivers
reversing to a loading dock.

Well, one probably shouldn't stand between the loading dock and the
rear of the truck with any driver :-)
--
cheers,

John B.


That's one of the primary Rules of Life: 'No good deed goes
unpunished.'

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/l...ylmar/2348604/

The news article itself didn't seem very informative but the reference
to someone who was going to offer some new law to give better
protection said that the guy was pinned between two cars.

I find the attitude that there need to be more laws to prevent people
backing into others, or running over people to be, well, a bit
ludicrous. If you back into some-body/thing it is YOUR fault and all
the whining about "Oh! I couldn't see" is quite simply B.S. Just turn
your head, or if necessary get out of the car and look.... even when
it is raining.


Yes indeed. Compare to Canada where a nutjob recently killed
22 people, nine of them by bludgeoning/arson, the rest with
firearms illegally smuggled from USA. All those actions are
crimes already.

His Highness Fidel II decided to ban a wide range of
firearms unrelated to the crimes of the instant because
solving problems is work, accepting some small degree of
chaos/anomaly in a free society is sensible but deflection
and punishment of the innocent wins votes.

I'm not sure who "Fedel II" is but one of the overwhelming attributes
of politicians is to be seen to "be doing something about the problem"
even if the "something" is totally ineffective. When election time
comes a few voters may remember that your solution didn't work but
many will remember that you "took positive action in a timely manner".

Think of ""Ich bin ein Berliner" and the news coverage!

(although a "Berliner" can equally be the name of a sort of jelly
donut :-)
https://tinyurl.com/mfx9kea
--
cheers,

John B.


I've been told by German speakers that it could be heard as
a pun but wasn't in context.

No, you are correct, in the circumstance in which it was said it
accepted as a claim they he too was a Berliner.

But exactly the same phrase can be interpreted, equally as accurately,
as "I am a jelly donut".
My point was, as I said, people tend to remember the things said
rather than what the results were.
--
cheers,

John B.

On Sun, 3 May 2020 22:12:54 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 5/3/2020 7:31 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 5/3/2020 5:49 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 03 May 2020 10:15:44 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/2/2020 9:59 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 3 May 2020 02:38:25 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote:

On Sat, 02 May 2020 00:32:55 -0700, lou.holtman wrote:


Modern cars have all kind of sensors and a rear camera. Very helpful.

IME, these do not overcome a basic inability in the skill of
reversing.
Some people just do not have the mental skill to ever reverse
anything.

Never volunteer to help with unloading when it involves amateur
drivers
reversing to a loading dock.

Well, one probably shouldn't stand between the loading dock and the
rear of the truck with any driver :-)
--
cheers,

John B.


That's one of the primary Rules of Life: 'No good deed goes
unpunished.'

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/l...ylmar/2348604/


The news article itself didn't seem very informative but the reference
to someone who was going to offer some new law to give better
protection said that the guy was pinned between two cars.

I find the attitude that there need to be more laws to prevent people
backing into others, or running over people to be, well, a bit
ludicrous. If you back into some-body/thing it is YOUR fault and all
the whining about "Oh! I couldn't see" is quite simply B.S. Just turn
your head, or if necessary get out of the car and look.... even when
it is raining.


Yes indeed. Compare to Canada where a nutjob recently killed 22 people,
nine of them by bludgeoning/arson, the rest with firearms illegally
smuggled from USA. All those actions are crimes already.

His Highness Fidel II decided to ban a wide range of firearms unrelated
to the crimes of the instant because solving problems is work, accepting
some small degree of chaos/anomaly in a free society is sensible but
deflection and punishment of the innocent wins votes.

I guess we'll see how well the Canadians survive without guns with
special features intended to facilitate mass killings.

So far, Australia seems to be getting along pretty well. New Zealand
too. Most of Europe has never had the problem in the first place.

But admittedly, none of those are a short walk from the gun-craziest
major country.

On the other hand there were some 36,560 killed on U.S. roads in 2018
and everyone just shrugs their shoulders and says "accident".
22 get killed with guns and all the zealots are leaping up and down,
waving their arms and screaming.
--
cheers,

John B.