160
It’s time to ban ‘right-on-red’
(www.fastcompany.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 30 Dec 2023
160 points (66.7% liked)
Fuck Cars
9661 readers
453 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 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:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Hate to break it to you but that link is talking in percentages. The only absolute number the give is number of fatalities, everything else is a percentage. Specifically, it claims that because turning right on red represents a small % of overall injuries from all traffic it's not unsafe. That's not an exaggeration, it's literally the conclusion they give.
A bullet to the arm is safer than a bullet to the head but that doesn't make it safe.
They literally use numbers in their report.
That data source does not include accidents that are not fatal. Do those not matter? The report also clearly identifies limitations of both data sources they use: what I read from that is we don’t have sufficient data
You people won't stop until folks are living in a bubble under gun point. There is always another low value crusade that most people don't want to hear about just shoved in their faces.
Compelling argument. Counter-point: what the fuck are you talking about and how does it relate to people's right not to be run over in the street?
If you drive a car, there's no issue. Since it's only pedestrians and cyclists getting hurt, the real solution here is simple: they should drive a car. This woke culture is all worked up about keeping their organs safe, because heaven forbid your skull gets cracked or shaken about and you end up with a little bit of permanent brain damage! Here's an idea: if you don't want a boo-boo in your head, try protecting yourself from two-ton hunks of rolling steel by moving around in one yourself!
Besides, on the grand scale of the inexcusably high number of automobile related deaths in the US, it's only a relatively small number of people getting hurt or dying in right-on-red accidents. After all, if people aren't sufficiently getting maimed, this is really not an issue worth discussing. Let's see these numbers go up first to an arbitrary threshold before having a constructive conversation about actionable ways that the US can take from developed countries where this problem doesn't exist in the first place.
Now we agree that the current status quo doesn't need to be changed, let's move on to debate unrelated challenges our society faces, like figuring out why American cities are so unappealing and what some significant causes of climate change are.
I guess it wasn't abundantly obvious that this is written tongue in cheek.
it is hard to rely on comedic appeal, for a somewhat random and unknown audience, to make up for a kind of sarcastic and mean set of writings, even if you'rr not being "serious".
but, we're also just getting some poe'd law in there. I think you'd get the point across better if, say, instead of just reccomending that everyone drives, you reccomended that everyone drove as large a car as possible in order to "beat everyone else" in a crash. even that might not be enough, though, I've definitely seen people who actually believe that.
I didn't expect anybody to believe that somebody would advocate in earnest that a bit of permanent brain damage isn't a big deal, but I guess there are such idiots. It's interesting to see that formulating the dumbest possible position is indiscernible from one side of a legitimate debate on the topic of road safety.
Counter point to your counter point, bikes kill pedestrians as well. You going to ban those?
Exceedingly rarely, almost to the point of not happening. You know this is a braindead argument.
ThatsThePoint.jpg.
Just like cars killing people on right hand reds. It's a very low occurring incident.
False. In my city right on red kills people every year, but there has only been one bike that killed a pedestrian in 40 years and even that seemed like a weird fluke if you read about it
I guess you'll just ignore the link I provided 🤷♂️ definitely feels more truthy your way
Yeah I should probably accept your link as reality instead of the facts that I know for sure
The link to actual data is less reliable than your feelings on what facts you know for sure?
..... Yeah, you should be accepting statistical data over what you feel you might know
You also a right wing troll?
What a stupid response. Do you think right wing dipshits use statistical facts?
You sure youre not the right wing troll?
I've seen this idiot over and over. I don't really care what you think is stupid.
You can see what ever you like as often as you like, your feelings arent grounds to dismiss actual recorded deaths per year.
Youre implying the government is hiding the deaths of people to protect "Big Right Turn." You sound insane.
Great you made stuff up about me good for you
Alright, youre clearly some maga wacko having a meltdown.
You let us know when you come down off whatever youre on, and you can remember the comments you typed
Truthiness. You just feel it's right!
No you right wing troll I walk around my city and see white bikes which symbolize people killed by morons like you, new ones all the time. I see the articles about who they were as people. And I've also read about the only person killed since the 80s by a bike. She was an elderly woman.
No one gives a single fuck about your efforts to make sure the world stays terrible. Leave Lemmy.
Random user who shares their unverifiable anecdotes or actual research. Tough choice.
I'm not trying to convince any carbrains of shit, not sure how you got the idea
Lololol whatever you say. I post data from the nhta but you know better I'm sure. Right wing troll 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Comment history is public.
Lololol you are literally arguing over data from the nhta, a government agency designed and traffic safety, and that makes me right wing? Lemmy in a nutshell. I call for pragmatic policy and get screeched at as a trumper. Unhinged delusional behavior, arguing against the nhtsa.
No one arguing good faith has ever used the word "screech". All you're doing is being as contrary as you can be, as anyone with thousands of negative karma would undoubtedly be doing. you must have a bridge to guard somewhere? Go do that
Whatever you say. It's crazy how chunks of lemmy acts when you post data that doesn't fit the narrative. You are calling others right wing trolls.
"Anyone I don't agree with is a trumper". Really unhinged internet tough guy behavior.
Negative 1963 karma speaks for its-fuckin-self.
Yes, there ARE a bunch of crazies on here who don't like it when I point out these things. I completely agree.
You say a bunch of moronic antagonistic bullshit, doesn't matter if 1/10 times you near being right.
👌👍 what ever gets you through the day!
What gets me through the day isn't being a contrarian for the sake of it alone. Great job on that though, everyone hates you and that's somehow....good or something. What an impressive show of extreme douchiness
Ahahaha
I said it's dumb policy and posted the data to back it up and you are just living fights calling others trolls and having a melt down.
I don't think I need a degree in psychology to see that a weirdo seeking mass disapproval from strangers has some sort of diagnosable condition colloquially known as being a troll
👌👍
We should advocate for having dedicated biking lanes to reduce these kinds of accidents, and redesign intersections to create a buffer space between pedestrian and bicycle crossing areas.
110% agree.
While fatalities are rare to the point of non-existence, it’s certainly a fair concern that bicyclists have too much difference in speed and maneuverability from pedestrians, risking too many accidents/injuries. That’s why we separate them: bicycling is not allowed on sidewalks