Fuck Cars
A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!
Rules
1. Be Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.
4. Stay on topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do not repost content that has already been posted in this community.
Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.
Posting Guidelines
In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:
- [meta] for discussions/suggestions about this community itself
- [article] for news articles
- [blog] for any blog-style content
- [video] for video resources
- [academic] for academic studies and sources
- [discussion] for text post questions, rants, and/or discussions
- [meme] for memes
- [image] for any non-meme images
- [misc] for anything that doesn’t fall cleanly into any of the other categories
Recommended communities:
view the rest of the comments
Yes, but the issue is it is a systemic thing, there are logical steps that lead from "simply being slapped with a fine" to "winding up in prison" through a chain of events by the overarching systems which dictate their life.
I already established that they are poor so they can't afford the fine which will mean they lose their license and eventually vehicle registration. Welp, that's even more expenses which they already couldn't afford, so this can't get rectified without outside assistance. I know Toronto is better about it than say the US but it is still pretty car-centric and this individual still needs to get to their job, shop for groceries, and generally be able to participate in society around them. Yet, now they don't have a car to do so but it is still necessitated by car-centric urban planning. So, this puts them in a desperate situation where they must commit crime (drive without license/registration) in order to survive. They can't just not go to work and not get groceries after all. It is only a matter of time before their luck runs out and they get caught but that doesn't change that they still must do the same thing tomorrow and the day after if they are to meet their needs, so they must continue to roll the dice.
As you said yourself, if they are caught repeatedly, which they will because as stated they don't have alternatives readily accessible, they are forced into prison.
I lived in Toronto for 15 years and I never owned a car, no you very much do not need one to get to your job, go shopping, and participate in society, especially not at Dufferin south of frickin' Bloor. People who get caught speeding so often that they can't afford to keep driving can... just stop driving and take transit, which is what most people there do. The idea that they literally have no other choice and will be forced into prison is just absurd.
Thank you for your anecdotal evidence, especially the poignant knowledge about the specific area in question of the article. I will take that into consideration with the rest of what I have read about Toronto as a whole but I do not change my position on what I have said previously.
The argument isn't something so simplistic as "they literally have no other choice", which unfairly frames the argument as a judgement on the moral character of the individual. You miss the point by focusing on something so arbitrary and subjective. I'm talking about the systemic nature of the situation and the flaws in its structure by specifically making allowance for the fact that humans are fallible beings who make mistakes to purposely avoid passing judgment of the individual. Just because you were able to do it with your overall circumstances doesn't mean that everyone is in a position to be able to do the same due to their own individual circumstances. Toronto isn't a perfect utopia free from systemic flaws.
I'm not suggesting that the moral character of the individual is in any way relevant here, and I'm glad driver's licenses are not issued or revoked on that basis. This is instead a straightforward question of public safety - anyone who consistently demonstrates that they are unable or unwilling to safely operate a motor vehicle on public roads according to the clearly posted and non-negotiable law should not permitted to risk the lives of others, and will be subject to escalating sanctions in order to accomplish that. There is definitely room for improvement in the system but it is fundamentally reasonable and sound. Yes, essentially anyone who lives in Toronto can get by without a car. Even if someone is severely physically disabled and confined to a wheelchair they can still use not only the fully accessible bus and subway system but also a separate disabled-specific transit system that provides door-to-door service using the same fee scale as the broader system. Toronto may not be a perfect utopia but it has gotten pretty close to solving this particular problem.
Ironically, people that are severely physically disabled are the ones that won't be owning cars so a good wheel-chair accessible city with reliable public transit is needed most for them.
This right here is a moral argument. You're suggesting that people are repeatedly making a conscious decision to "break the law".
The entire concept around "if only they just didn't choose to break the law" is a moral argument that places sole blame onto the individual for externalities that occurred as a result of the punitive nature of modern justice systems because they are based on the assumption that the individual "deserved to be punished because they are a 'bad person' for repeatedly 'breaking the law', so the consequences are their fault" instead of taking into account the material circumstances, understanding that humans are fallible creatures who unconsciously make mistakes, and not assign blame or punishment as it is inefficient at repressive, especially when those externalities have far reaching consequences for those of lesser means resulting in the punishment being unfairly weighted based on financial status. Instead, we need to improve our roadways to influence drivers through affecting the material conditions directly at the root cause.
And cool, that's your anecdotal take on Toronto and a single service exclusive to disabled people. What about non disabled people? They exist, in Toronto, you can go read those anecdotal accounts in the FuckCars sub on Reddit who speak about how car-centric areas of Toronto still are. Their anecdotal accounts are just as valid as yours. You simply assume that there are no situations that would be limiting to someone. I am making the opposite assumptions.
I emphatically disagree that it is "fundamentally reasonable and sound". I am fundamentally opposed to this kind of justice system and believe it to be systemically flawed and oppressive. Though this is getting into the larger topic about the validity of hierarchical, punitive justice systems. The entire point is cities need to stop relying on ineffectual and harmful stop-gap methods and instead improve the damn urban design which is proven to be leagues more effective without the systemically harmful side effects.
Moral judgements about individual choices and behavior are not necessary here. The fact is that the behavior of problem drivers, however it came to occur, threatens public safety and must be discouraged if we want to protect the lives of innocent people. I will readily admit that it is a moral judgement that public safety is more important that the convenience of a relative few, you've got me there.
I suppose it's not ideal that discouraging dangerous driving has to take the form of punishment but I'm not sure how else this important goal could be accomplished. Is there anywhere in the world that has successfully addressed this problem using other methods? For better or for worse people respond to these incentives, and in the absence of better alternatives we have to accept this reality if we want government to be effective.
It's not ideal that wealthier people are discouraged less by monetary fines, but the province of Ontario does also impose non-monetary demerit points that will eventually lead to license suspension regardless of the ability to pay.
I don't expect you to take my word or anyone else's for this, feel free to look up a TTC system map and review some of the schedules if you want to have a better idea of just how much coverage the TTC provides in Toronto, all with prices much lower than the total cost of ownership of a private vehicle.