Modern cars are very safe for the occupants compared to all previous iterations. It's the people by foot or bike you crash those cars into that are in a bad place.

Though different cars differ. SUVs are particularly bad for pedestrians and cyclists.

In the truck-loving US yes, but in Europe, pedestrian crash safety is also taken into account and has improved a lot. E.g. Volvo have hoods that pop up on impact to cushion the blow for pedestrians.

Of course they're still less safe than not-cars, but in comparison to 50 years ago much has improved.

That hood popping system is also in BMWs, it may have become mandatory by now. Is it not included in US models?

It is but rather than normal cars, Americans prefer driving large pick-up trucks that are like being hit by a brick wall

https://cdn.theatlantic.com/thumbor/AtTPZlAj9QVkg7ZtJ6q9Vk9c...

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/12/suvs-truck...

All modern cars are deadly, just the deadliness is projected outwards.

Don’t get me wrong, increased car safety is a good thing but people can drive like maniacs with a pretty good assurance they’re not going to be seriously injured even if they get in a crash. So they do. Which is bad news is you’re a pedestrian or a cyclist.

They drove the same (or likely worse!) in 1960 when cars went just as fast as today, but they didn't have either the drivers training or the safety features of a modern car.

Aren't bicycles more deadly per passenger mile?

In terms of being killed by other vehicles on the road yes

I too agree with the banning of cars from areas where pedestrians and cyclists are likely to be, for example, all city centres and residential areas.

You don't need to go quite so far. Dutch levels of separation are probably enough.

The roads belonged to pedestrians, horses, and bicycles a long time before the car infestation took over