• my_hat_stinks@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Compelling argument. Counter-point: what the fuck are you talking about and how does it relate to people’s right not to be run over in the street?

    • poopkins@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      If you drive a car, there’s no issue. Since it’s only pedestrians and cyclists getting hurt, the real solution here is simple: they should drive a car. This woke culture is all worked up about keeping their organs safe, because heaven forbid your skull gets cracked or shaken about and you end up with a little bit of permanent brain damage! Here’s an idea: if you don’t want a boo-boo in your head, try protecting yourself from two-ton hunks of rolling steel by moving around in one yourself!

      Besides, on the grand scale of the inexcusably high number of automobile related deaths in the US, it’s only a relatively small number of people getting hurt or dying in right-on-red accidents. After all, if people aren’t sufficiently getting maimed, this is really not an issue worth discussing. Let’s see these numbers go up first to an arbitrary threshold before having a constructive conversation about actionable ways that the US can take from developed countries where this problem doesn’t exist in the first place.

      Now we agree that the current status quo doesn’t need to be changed, let’s move on to debate unrelated challenges our society faces, like figuring out why American cities are so unappealing and what some significant causes of climate change are.

      • poopkins@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I guess it wasn’t abundantly obvious that this is written tongue in cheek.

        • daltotron@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          it is hard to rely on comedic appeal, for a somewhat random and unknown audience, to make up for a kind of sarcastic and mean set of writings, even if you’rr not being “serious”.

          but, we’re also just getting some poe’d law in there. I think you’d get the point across better if, say, instead of just reccomending that everyone drives, you reccomended that everyone drove as large a car as possible in order to “beat everyone else” in a crash. even that might not be enough, though, I’ve definitely seen people who actually believe that.

          • poopkins@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I didn’t expect anybody to believe that somebody would advocate in earnest that a bit of permanent brain damage isn’t a big deal, but I guess there are such idiots. It’s interesting to see that formulating the dumbest possible position is indiscernible from one side of a legitimate debate on the topic of road safety.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        bikes kill pedestrians

        Exceedingly rarely, almost to the point of not happening. You know this is a braindead argument.

          • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            False. In my city right on red kills people every year, but there has only been one bike that killed a pedestrian in 40 years and even that seemed like a weird fluke if you read about it

              • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yeah I should probably accept your link as reality instead of the facts that I know for sure

                • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The link to actual data is less reliable than your feelings on what facts you know for sure?

                  … Yeah, you should be accepting statistical data over what you feel you might know

                  • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    No you right wing troll I walk around my city and see white bikes which symbolize people killed by morons like you, new ones all the time. I see the articles about who they were as people. And I’ve also read about the only person killed since the 80s by a bike. She was an elderly woman.

                    No one gives a single fuck about your efforts to make sure the world stays terrible. Leave Lemmy.

      • poopkins@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        We should advocate for having dedicated biking lanes to reduce these kinds of accidents, and redesign intersections to create a buffer space between pedestrian and bicycle crossing areas.

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        While fatalities are rare to the point of non-existence, it’s certainly a fair concern that bicyclists have too much difference in speed and maneuverability from pedestrians, risking too many accidents/injuries. That’s why we separate them: bicycling is not allowed on sidewalks