this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2026
171 points (98.3% liked)

Fuck Cars

14406 readers
1074 users here now

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 CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon'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 topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo 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:

Recommended communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] shirro@aussie.zone 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)

As an Australian who has lived with compulsory helmets for decades I think wearing a helmet and high vis is probably bare minimum if you have to share with cars and not nearly enough if you have to use door lanes and deal with Ford Rangers and garbage trucks.

Unfortunately once you go down this route cycling partipation drops and its a net fail for public health.

Sedate cycling on seperated pathways and through parks gets lumped in with high risk road cycling. It ends up being completely inappropriate for the type of cycling most people would like to do (not high risk vehicular cycling).

Why bother building expensive dedicated safe infrastructure when people have a magical inch of styrofoam on their noggins and a yellow shirt.to protect them from 2 tonnes of murder machine.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 3 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

"high risk" is relative. cycling is safe.

[–] Railcar8095@lemmy.world 4 points 15 hours ago

Highest risk cycling is motor vehicles not following the rules. If cyclists safety is the priority, educate other drivers, and enforce penalties.

Yes, pedestrians only roadways & other important infrastructure is must, but it best to use good enough helmets over none. You my brother bought me a skydiving adventure with a expert on my back as fall through the sky, because I loved the glider experience (by the). When the corporation said, I could wear a helmet, because it endangers the expert on my back. My mind & my head’s senses are the most part of my body, so I said, no thank you, to my brother. I told my brother, it is transferable, so why do not you use the experience, he said he would never do skydiving.