The figures are from 2013, so very out of date, but for the UK (where I live) it is 5.1 road fatalaties per 100,000 motor vehicles. For the US it is 12.9, and for China 104.5. I think that shows pretty starkly that the reason we are paying so much more for our cars is for a massively higher chance of surviving an accident.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-r...
Modern American and European cars may have a positive impact on the fatality rate, but the numbers above don't prove it in any way. I suspect the local culture of driving and the legal policy explain most of the differences between these rates.
BTW, when walking or riding a bicycle, I'd rather get hit by a 20 year old average car than a modern SUV.
Been there, done that and it still hurts.
Though...it does turn out that learning how to do a proper parachute landing fall in the army is directly applicable to civilian life and distracted drivers.
Local culture has a huge impact. Adherence to seatbelt laws, tolerance of drunk driving etc vary massively.
> BTW, when walking or riding a bicycle, I'd rather get hit by a 20 year old average car than a modern SUV
I'm not 100% sold on that - modern safety ratings like Euro NCAP also rate injuries to pedestrians so the hoods of modern vehicles are designed to give way. Some cars (e.g. Volvo) even go as far as to have active hoods - "Sensors in the bumper detect when a pedestrian has been struck and actuators lift the bonnet to provide greater clearance to stiff structures in the engine compartment"
You might also not even get hit in the first place thanks to AEB systems.
To the extent that the cars are replacing scooters, they are an unmitigated benefit, safety wise.