Ontario

3295 readers

3 users here now

A place to discuss all the news and events taking place in the province of Ontario, Canada.

Rules

No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
Be respectful, especially when disagreeing. Everyone should feel welcome here.
No porn.
No Ads / Spamming.

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

Rumblestiltskin@lemmy.ca

CowsLookLikeMaps@sh.itjust.works

177

Ontario court strikes down Ford government's plan to remove Toronto bike lanes (www.cbc.ca)

submitted 5 months ago by avidamoeba@lemmy.ca to c/ontario@lemmy.ca

22 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Judge ruled that the removal of the 3 bike lanes will put 'people at increased risk of harm and death'

The judge ruled Wednesday that Cycle Toronto and others "have established that removal of the target bike lanes will put people at increased risk of harm and death, which engages the right to life and security of the person."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 11 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Judge ruled that the removal of the 3 bike lanes will put ‘people at increased risk of harm and death’

The judge ruled Wednesday that Cycle Toronto and others “have established that removal of the target bike lanes will put people at increased risk of harm and death, which engages the right to life and security of the person.”

I'm no genius, but can't the exact same ruling be used in favour of urgently expanding cycling networks and infrastructure?

The lack of this infrastructure is putting "people at increased risk of harm and death, which engages the right to life and security of the person", does it not?

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

That's @panda_abyss'es argument and it might work to add infrastructure where it doesn't exist but probably not to absolute zero cars. Which is fine. 😄

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Absolute zero cars is a naiively unrealistic goal.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 months ago

Of course. There are plenty of use cases that require them.

[–] dermanus@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 months ago

No, because the problem with the act was where it removed lanes already built, and the only justification provided had no evidence to support it.

The government can violate your section 7 rights, under section 1. This failed that test by being arbitrary.