52
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml to c/fuckcars@lemmy.world

You're walking home late at night from the bar because you've had 11 shots of tequila but you still made the conscious decision not to drive for the safety of others.

You're crossing a stroad.

Someone "in a hurry" decide to run the red light and hits you at 70 km/h (because of course they were speeding, why wouldn't they?), doesn't see you because you're hunched over while you're walking and it's really dark and the person is driving a giant SUV with shit visibility.

Cars are one of the largest source of fatal pedestrian accidents in a major city. How much more likely are you to get into an accident if you're drunk and is less able to pay attention to cars breaking the rules and putting you in danger? Walking safely in most cities is a task you need to be sober for because you have to walk super defensively.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] sxan@midwest.social -3 points 2 weeks ago

And boating (which is actually illegal, in Minnesota, at least), although you mostly end up killing only yourself.

And bicycling, where drunk bicyclists are almost more of a hazard to pedestrians than cars, if to less effect. You might only be put in the hospital, but bicyclists are not required to carry insurance, so good luck recouping your medical costs.

[-] rolling_resistance@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago
[-] sxan@midwest.social 1 points 2 weeks ago

Yes, our health care system sucks, but I'd it didn't, we'd be dirty communists like the Canadians.

/s

[-] Katana314@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago

Cycling collisions, while harmful, are orders of magnitude less harmful than collisions involving cars, especially SUVs.

When you hear about a life-threatening or life-ending traffic injury, you can assume it wasn’t two people walking, or two people biking, or one biking and one walking, etc. You can always assume a car was involved.

[-] sxan@midwest.social 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I did say cycling/pedestrian accidents are less fatal. I just don't believe that justifies irresponsible cycling. You can still easily be put into the hospital by a cyclist, and (in America) you'll be paying your own bills. And bills or not, I don't need or any any pain, suffering, broken bones, bruises, concussions, or any damage that's caused by being hit by a cyclist.

Pets can be fatally injured by cyclists, and they often share the same space as pedestrians.

Just... don't navigate any vehicle in public while inebriated.

this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2024
52 points (78.9% liked)

Fuck Cars

9496 readers
36 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS