Although saying per capita here would be misleading, because it’s not like those people ride the subway 500 times AND drives a car everywhere. The ones who take the subway are the only ones at risk of subway homocide, the ones who drive are actually less likely to die in a traffic accident than people outside of their car like pedestrians and bikers, and the two groups probably are much different in size.
Yeah but I don’t understand how it would combine with the 500 rides. Were they counting only people who rode 500 times a year? Or is the implication that for this line they didn’t go by 100000 people, but instead by 500 rides? That would make it incomparable. I just don’t get it
The per 100,000 is pretty standard for per capita
Although saying per capita here would be misleading, because it’s not like those people ride the subway 500 times AND drives a car everywhere. The ones who take the subway are the only ones at risk of subway homocide, the ones who drive are actually less likely to die in a traffic accident than people outside of their car like pedestrians and bikers, and the two groups probably are much different in size.
Yeah but I don’t understand how it would combine with the 500 rides. Were they counting only people who rode 500 times a year? Or is the implication that for this line they didn’t go by 100000 people, but instead by 500 rides? That would make it incomparable. I just don’t get it
Oh I had to go back to see what you were referring to with the 500 rides thing… Maybe that’s the sample size for NYC?