Comment by BugsJustFindMe

Remember, I'm responding specifically to how good people are at driving, not how likely they are to die while driving. How likely a person is to die is mediated by all kinds of things that have nothing to do with how good they are as a driver, like airbags and seatbelts and crumple zones.

In thread context, you're conflating a bunch of things, and it screws up your position as each additional conflation gets you further and further from your headline statistic into "??? -> Profit" underpants gnomes territory.

1) Fatalities vs non-fatal injuries. Not the same thing.

2) Crashes that caused injury vs crashes that did not cause injury. Not the same thing.

3) Crashes that did not cause injury vs crashes that could not have caused injury. Not the same thing.

4) Crashes vs unsafe behaviors that could cause a crash. Not the same thing.

5) Being "safe" in the sense of "enjoying fortunate circumstance" vs being "safe" in the sense of "actively contributing to safety". Not the same thing.

Here is a thought experiment for you to consider:

If you run a red light and the cross traffic brakes and swerves around you, so no collision occurs, were you driving safely? No, right? Then why would you think that fatalities are the true measure of driving goodness?