In the US, deaths deaths cars are treated less harshly than deaths involving firearms. One common example used to teach about jury biases is deaths due to drunk driving. Many jury members can empathize with driving drunk because many Americans have driven after drinking, even if they were under the legal limit

IDK if you should be calling other people ignorant if you didn't even know that much

You can kill someone with a gun and have it be called an accident. You can also intentionally run someone down with your vehicle and have it be called vehicular homicide.

We can say "fuck cars" without false equivalencies.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328812169_If_You_Want_to_Get_Away_with_Murder_Use_Your_Car_A_Discursive_Content_Analysis_of_Pedestrian_Traffic_Fatalities_in_News_Headlines

It could even be murder, if you can prove the driver had intent/premeditation.

But to answer your questions RE: meme/law, look which comm this is in lol. Can't let logic get in the way of "car bad."

Somebody (@Jhex) else posted that there is apparently research giving some creedence to this.

But I agree, this meme is death-spiral-cult level. It's for fellow anti-car folks to commiserate, but it's probably net negative overall to post memes like this since they can be easily mocked by carbrainers.

You can be but often aren't, especially if the pedestrian or cyclist was on the road at the time

The difference in intent makes sense. The difference in primary function does not, killing a person with a kitchen knife is no better than with a gun.

The problem with car accidents is that it’s difficult to know the intent of a person, especially carelessness kills a lot more people via cars than via kitchen knifes, and we can’t know for sure when it was an honest mistake by the driver.

I think if you ignore the intention of the manufacturer for a moment and focus on the acts of the individual, they'll seem closer.

Both cars and guns are dangerous devices. Both can be used for intentional murder.

Both guns and cars are so dangerous that they should not ever be used carelessly. In fact, it would be the height of recklessness to use either one without constant vigilance. You could easily kill somebody.

But with guns, people generally accept that there is a wrong way to use them, and that it's your fault if you don't have trigger discipline, or if you ever point the barrel at someone without thinking.

On the other hand, the same cannot be said about cars. Just look how people react when you mention defensive driving, a system of disciplines that make driving safer for both the driver and anyone else near the road.

People are so used to getting away with driving poorly that they are willing to accept deaths rather than even hearing about safer driving habits.

TIL: the primary function of balconies is murder!

Any tool or item can be used to take a life or cause injury.

It could be argued guns are designed for hunting, and cars are designed for travel, but both can be used to cause harm.

Hell even a shopping cart design to haul groceries can be used to harm. Relevant video in the link.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePmc1656EVo

Accidental and intentional killing should both be discouraged.

Its a strange world were somehow we have been conditioned to belive travel on foot or cycling is somewhat "lesser" then travel by car.

Hopefully the notion of "Car is King" dies one day, and we build cities once again for the people living in them.

Here the charge is nothing.

https://www.thewhig.com/feature/kingston-ontario-cyclist-fatality-police

It's not misinformation. It's explaining that if you want to off someone, proving murder with a car is much more difficult. You have reason to be driving a car. You have less reason to be brandishing a gun.

Literally