Technology

The fact that Ram drivers are a close second is hilarious. I guess there is some truth to all the jokes about Rams being driven by aggressive idiots.

Because a bunch of idiots take their hands off their steering wheel and think Elmo's car is 100% safe.

A friendly reminder that road safety advocates recommend against the use of the word "accident" to describe car crashes, because it downplays the fact that many crashes are preventable, either by better safe road design or by the drivers being more responsible with with 2 tonne machinery they are operating.

This is purely my anecdotal experience, but Tesla drivers appear to be some of the worst drivers on the road. There are stereotypes of drivers. BMW's never signal their turns, Jeeps think they can drive basically however they want including on shoulders, and Tesla drivers are oblivious to any kind of spatial understanding of the road around them.

i know many of you all just LOVE to hate on Tesla, it's like the shit flavor of he year for hating and no doubt Elon's shit fuckery is partially driving it, but honestly this is an absolutely classic Forbes piece of garbage. Firstly, it's a masterclass in selective bias - focusing solely on Tesla while barely whispering about Ram's near-similar accident rates. Classic move to sensationalize one brand over another. Then there's the U.S. only scope, which conveniently ignores the global context which could paint a vastly different picture. The article kicks off with a 'non-causal' disclaimer but then spends the rest of the time subtly linking Tesla's Autopilot to the high accident rate, without concrete evidence. It's a bit like saying 'no offense' before offending someone.

The Tesla recall is mentioned, sneakily implying a connection to the accident rate, despite the lack of direct correlation. The article is less about informing and more about crafting a narrative that fits a preconceived notion, all while skating on thin ice made of half-truths and strategic omissions.

I know its super pedantic, but the word “accident” really grinds my gears in this context.

The proper terminology is “crash”.. accident infers that there is no fault or misconduct.

I have a hard time seeing why the average person should have a zero to 60 in the sub 6 second range. People fucking suck at driving.

Is it possible that there's a large overlap between idiots who are bad at driving and the type of people who buy Teslas?

I blame the touchscreen first ideology. Give em some physical buttons that you can feel without taking your eyes off the road.

That and the sheer power can make accidents happen faster than you can react.

How can you write an article like this with zero citations? They mention Lending Tree, who is a mortgage originator and that's it.

But Tesla always says the opposite.

People are allowed cars they don't have skills to use.

I'm not looking forward to the day a tesla cyber truck hits someone. That's gonna be a grisly scene in the right conditions.

Maybe they're sentient and actively suicidal.

And doesn't his newest atrocity, long overdue and underdelivered/overpriced, also have a front end like a knife?

Source: https://www.lendingtree.com/insurance/brand-incidents-study/