Reverse-angle parking is better than head-in angled parking on streets.

If the Potsdam study showed reverse angle parking to be safer, why would people object to even experimenting with the method? To start with, "there are so few accidents that result from backing out of a parking space it's a non-problem. " -lets look at the under reporting of these types of collision The University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center studied pedestrian-motor vehicle collisions during 2004-2008 for The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Division of Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation. The report, entitled North Carolina Pedestrian Crash Facts 2004 – 2008, found the following safety concerns: • North Carolina is ranked the ninth (9the) highest State in the U. S. , up from twelfth (12the) in 2007, for pedestrian fatalities per capita. • Over the past five years 12,547 pedestrian-motor vehicle collisions have been reported in North Carolina. • Pedestrians ages 15 and younger accounted for 15% of pedestrian-motor vehicle crashes during 2005-2009. • Nearly half (46%) of all pedestrian- motor vehicle crashes occurred on local streets reflecting higher levels of walking – numbers of pedestrians in cities and neighborhoods. Over a quarter (26%) of crashes occurred in parking lots, public drive ways, and other public areas • Sixty-five percent (65%) of pedestrian-motor vehicle crashes took place on roads with a speed limit of 35 miles or less in areas where more walking and pedestrian crossing takes place. I would argue that Con stating Back over accidents are a non-problem is a very troubling statement. Con states that Backing collisions don't fit into any categories and are negligible this only means the numbers could be very much larger. I would instead look at incidents involving backovers 292 casualties and over an estimated 18,000 injuries were reported. [1]Also I would ask that Con will use exact numbers of injuries and Casualties for victims Percentages have a way of not letting us see the real picture for example 1.6% seems really same but these are people. Reverse-angle parking doesn't hurt businessCon asserts that reverse angle parking hurts business and then provides no substantial evidence to prove this claim, the evidence he did show only showed agree business owners who are afraid of change the report was only weeks after the parking had been implemented and no Data would be conclusive. The Opinion of these consumers is that of fear and not wanting to accept change with the "If it ain't broke dont' fix it" ideal this mindset would have completely shut out advances in mostly anything from the automobile to the plane. Some people don't like seatbelts and find it annoying but it improves safety and should be accepted, I would instead look at the many cities that have implemented reverse angle parking now and look at their economic problem. Cities that include reverse-angled parking are the Epicenters of our country some cities Washington DC, New York City, San Francisco, And Charlotte these cities are are experiencing no Economic effect related to how they park. [2(Pottstown study)][3] Also with increased Bicycle traffic Business would increase not decrease. [4] In conclusion extrodianary claims requre extrodinary evidence which Con has failed to provide. Head-in parking is not saferAll of the evidence I have provided that Head in parking is more dangerous than Reverse angle parking The Blind-spots, pedestrian injury data and commong logic. One can Deduce that it is safer to to stop traffic while you are in it and back up safely in-between two stationary objects than it is to back against fast moving traffic. His evidence for it being safer was based on a single college that is probably against the idea simply because of the human inherit trait of not wanting to accept change. Change is viewed as a negative thing when at times its an improvement. Reserve-angle parking is better because it improves public safety, street awareness, and business. Also one of Cons points was that Head-in was better because it stained walls, Con would be willing to trade Civilian and business well-being for that of clean fences. . http://www.iihs.org... . http://www.hampdenhappenings.org... . http://www.hampdenhappenings.org... . http://www.bikeleague.org...