Fuck Cars
This community exists as a sister community/copycat community to the r/fuckcars subreddit.
This community exists for the following reasons:
- to raise awareness around the dangers, inefficiencies and injustice that can come from car dependence.
- to allow a place to discuss and promote more healthy transport methods and ways of living.
You can find the Matrix chat room for this community here.
Rules
-
Be nice to each other. Being aggressive or inflammatory towards other users will get you banned. Name calling or obvious trolling falls under that. Hate cars, hate the system, but not people. While some drivers definitely deserve some hate, most of them didn't choose car-centric life out of free will.
-
No bigotry or hate. Racism, transphobia, misogyny, ableism, homophobia, chauvinism, fat-shaming, body-shaming, stigmatization of people experiencing homeless or substance users, etc. are not tolerated. Don't use slurs. You can laugh at someone's fragile masculinity without associating it with their body. The correlation between car-culture and body weight is not an excuse for fat-shaming.
-
Stay on-topic. Submissions should be on-topic to the externalities of car culture in urban development and communities globally. Posting about alternatives to cars and car culture is fine. Don't post literal car fucking.
-
No traffic violence. Do not post depictions of traffic violence. NSFW or NSFL posts are not allowed. Gawking at crashes is not allowed. Be respectful to people who are a victim of traffic violence or otherwise traumatized by it. News articles about crashes and statistics about traffic violence are allowed. Glorifying traffic violence will get you banned.
-
No reposts. Before sharing, check if your post isn't a repost. Reposts that add something new are fine. Reposts that are sharing content from somewhere else are fine too.
-
No misinformation. Masks and vaccines save lives during a pandemic, climate change is real and anthropogenic - and denial of these and other established facts will get you banned. False or highly speculative titles will get your post deleted.
-
No harassment. Posts that (may) cause harassment, dogpiling or brigading, intentionally or not, will be removed. Please do not post screenshots containing uncensored usernames. Actual harassment, dogpiling or brigading is a bannable offence.
Please report posts and comments that violate our rules.
view the rest of the comments
I'm having trouble visualizing this. Does this mean that at a walking speed of 3km/h it would take ten entire minutes to get to a cross walk? Because that's insane.
In Sweden we have crosswalks very regularly, usually like a couple minutes of walking at most. For bus stops farther between intersections there are markers indicating that people will cross, even without a normal crossing marker. For areas which can't have a crossing (you may need to walk around a ways to get under or over four lanes) they put up barriers to prevent walking across.
When Americans complain about everything being car-centric, this is exactly the kind of shit they’re complaining about.
My grocery store is a mile away, but I can’t legally walk there. There are no crosswalks to get to the store. If I’m going to fully obey the law as written, I must use a car just to go to the store.
No there were crosswalks, but the kids decided to "jaywalk" or cross outside a crossing, hence the reason the driver's not being charged. Drivers should be aware yes but it's not expected that children will dart out onto the road, frogger-style trying to cross outside crosswalks, much the reason I am afraid of my dumb dog doing it.
Jaywalking should not be a law on low speed roads. And highways rarely have crosswalks.
But if the crosswalks are unreasonably far apart then pedestrians are being encouraged by the state to engage in unsafe behavior. As I said, they could erect a small fence to prevent unsafe crossings. This is a failure of the state to serve its people.
I'm not sure how to feel about the driver not being charged, but one should drive with the expectation that unforeseen hazards will pop up at any moment, especially children. I would not be shocked to learn that he was driving one of those enormous American cars that makes it impossible to see short adults, another failure of the state. Or that the speed limit was too high. These things would make me feel the fault is more on the state than on the driver. (But it definitely isn't on the parents.)
As for your dog, just keep it on a lead. It's the safest thing for everyone if all dogs are secured properly while going about town.
e: Also his age. How good is the vision and reaction time of this 76-year-old man? How often are they re-testing drivers?
@stray @turtlesareneat erecting fences to prevent unsafe crossings is usually done way before adequate crossing options are given.
Yes, hostile architecture does sound exactly like the "solution" they'd go for. I hope I didn't imply the wrong thing; I think fences in conjunction with adequate crossings is the answer.
Thinking more about it, I don't think we actually have jaywalking laws here, or at least they aren't enforced in town. I should hope there's some kind of rules about being a hazard in busy traffic, but everyone walks in the street in town when cars and bikes aren't coming, right in front of police even, and I think that's very reasonable. Many streets are only open to buses, taxis, and delivery vehicles, so it's quiet and safe.
Jaywalking laws, like most laws, vary by State. In Illinois, for example, the pedestrian ALWAYS has the right of way. I think jaywalking can still be a local-level crime, but even if it is, the driver is always at fault for hitting a pedestrian.