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
Which scenario is more likely? A car having a lane departure event, or a car having a lane departure event at the exact moment the area next to them is packed with cyclists and pedestrians?
Seeing how this truck managed to go for a mile or so in the bike lane without hitting anyone, I'd definitely err on the side of a car going into the bike lane being more probable than a car going into the bike line right next to a whole bunch of cyclists.
If bikers felt better protected, maybe more would bike. In my country something like this would become mass murder. It doesn't though.
Every road is different, and the protections for the people on the roads should be based on how those roads are being used. This road has a bike lane, and it should make sufficient protections for the cyclcist AND the drivers. If the road had way more cyclists, or cycling was becoming more prevalent, it would make sense to put in better infrastructure to protect that use in those areas. You'll note that not every railroad crossing has a dedicated bridge going over it, or armature, or lights, or even a signal. Those protections are put up based on how frequently the crossing is used and weighed against the damage of an accident there. Simply put, that road doesn't have the cycling demand to build dedicated infrastructure, but there is definitely enough demand to make sure that a truck can't just brodoze down the lane.