Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives • Hacker News Board

Re: Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives

#231

Post by adrianN » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 1:55 PM UTC

pixl97 wrote: post #219

u801e wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Older people losing their cars is often the start of a decline unto death because there’s so little you can do [without] driving in many neighborhoods. The solution is to replace their car with a vehicle that's less dangerous for others like an electrically assisted tricycle. That can serve their local transportation needs and won't cause nearly as much damage if they hit someone or something.

They are very apt to be hit and killed by other bad drivers in that slow vehicle.

Replace everyone's cars with electric tricycles then.

Re: Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives

#232

Post by stronglikedan » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 1:56 PM UTC

methodover wrote: post #43

“Given New York’s lax enforcement record, the Freakonomics podcast described running over pedestrians there as “the perfect crime.”” I was driving in Oakland when the car in front of me didn’t slow down for a pedestrian in the crosswalk. The pedestrian disappeared in front of the car. I stopped my car, got out, found the struck young woman trembling and bleeding in the street. The speed limit was 30 miles per hour. I…

As a pedestrian (or cyclist), you should always give way to cars, even being prepared to jump out of the way when you have the right-of-way. Unless the driver is intoxicated, they get inconvenienced with higher insurance premiums for a little while at worst, while you get stuck with life long injuries and pain at worst.

Re: Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives

#233

Post by Broken_Hippo » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 1:59 PM UTC

patriot1911 wrote: post #230

pixl97 wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because that's when you can get a license in many states.

But not in The Netherlands, which he explicitly stated he was from. The real answer is that he probably wasn't driving a car.

Has it always been that age? We do not know how old the poster is, nor whether or not he had a regular lisence or a permit.

Re: Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives

#234

Post by bspammer » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 1:59 PM UTC

pavel_lishin wrote: post #217

wycy wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like absolute common sense that as abilities degrade as you age you should have to retest for drivers licenses periodically. Perhaps with greatly increasing periodicity with increasing age. However, any politician who proposed or approved such an idea would be immediately voted out of office, because old people are very reliable voters. So it's not going to happen.

There's no way to pass such a law without it seeming agist - because it would be. It seems to me, probably naively, that the easiest way around this would be to require yearly tests for everyone . You're driving a huge honking piece of metal at 60+ miles an hour down the street; a yearly verification of your ability to do so doesn't seem excessive.

Cognitive decline happens to everyone the longer they live, if that's ageism then I'm afraid it's also reality. Testing everyone yearly would be prohibitively expensive.

Hopefully, self-driving cars will eventually render these discussions redundant. But that still seems to be decades away at this rate.

Re: Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives

#235

Post by albedoa » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 2:00 PM UTC

wil421 wrote: post #184

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, what!? In Europe if you strike a pedestrian on the crosswalk you'll definitely loose your license and be looking at manslaughter charges too while your insurance company will murder you after paying the victim's medical/disability/court bills.

I’m not really sure the above comment is an accurate representation of the US. In my City an elderly lady stuck a child at a bus stop and killed her.[1] This lady had the audacity to try and get her license back after they took it but before the trial. [1] https://www.montlick.com/montlick-blog/auto-accidents/333-el...

Your one example incident involved a stopped school bus and the death of a child back in 2009. That you recall the result as being extraordinary ten years later should reenforce the representation.

Re: Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives

#236

Post by claudius » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 2:00 PM UTC

dalbasal wrote: post #118

dannyw wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Counties with significant domestic car industries: * USA * Japan Countries out of the first list, with policies favouring cars: 1/2 Conclusion: Insufficient data.

If you add in Germany, I think you get 1.5/3

2/3, no way policies in Germany don't favour cars.

Re: Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives

#237

Post by jejones3141 » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 2:02 PM UTC

lostjohnny wrote: post #182

tremon wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of your argument is about motorized vehicles, not bicycles. I agree that motorized two-wheeled vehicles are inherently more dangerous than non-motorized forms of transportation, but that is multiple separate discussions, and your argument doesn't necessarily apply to bicycle-oriented vs car-oriented city design. Walkable cities are for everyone. This is trivially untrue. Cities with lots of steps or staircases a…

> Most of your argument is about motorized vehicles, not bicycles They are the same thing. Bicycles have wheels, they should be on the streets. > Cities with lots of steps or staircases are only accessible for pedestrians, but no one else. And that's good! BTW, you can walk the bike. Just like you do when you have to jump on a train or take the subway. If you're talking about accessibility in general, that's a whole…

>> Cities with lots of steps or staircases are only accessible for pedestrians, but no one else.

> And that's good!

Even for people with difficulty walking or in wheelchairs?

Re: Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives

#238

Post by Broken_Hippo » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 2:04 PM UTC

Spooky23 wrote: post #205

methodover wrote: post #43

“Given New York’s lax enforcement record, the Freakonomics podcast described running over pedestrians there as “the perfect crime.”” I was driving in Oakland when the car in front of me didn’t slow down for a pedestrian in the crosswalk. The pedestrian disappeared in front of the car. I stopped my car, got out, found the struck young woman trembling and bleeding in the street. The speed limit was 30 miles per hour. I…

It's an impossible case to prosecute, as the woman had no bad intent, probably had a clean record, and the only evidence is eyewitness testimony. Eyewitnesses suck at trial, and defending the elderly is pretty easy.

There is a wide berth between prosecution and no pentalty whatsoever.

For example, In many states, you can lose a license without being prosecuted. Indiana is one of them.

Alternatively, a prudent measure would be to require the driver to get a medical clearance to drive again. This, in my opinion, would be the wise choice.

Re: Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives

#239

Post by myspy » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 2:05 PM UTC

stronglikedan wrote: post #232

methodover wrote: post #43

“Given New York’s lax enforcement record, the Freakonomics podcast described running over pedestrians there as “the perfect crime.”” I was driving in Oakland when the car in front of me didn’t slow down for a pedestrian in the crosswalk. The pedestrian disappeared in front of the car. I stopped my car, got out, found the struck young woman trembling and bleeding in the street. The speed limit was 30 miles per hour. I…

As a pedestrian (or cyclist), you should always give way to cars, even being prepared to jump out of the way when you have the right-of-way. Unless the driver is intoxicated, they get inconvenienced with higher insurance premiums for a little while at worst, while you get stuck with life long injuries and pain at worst.

Which is a reason why cars have to vanish from cities.

Re: Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives

#240

Post by patriot1911 » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 2:06 PM UTC

gavia1 wrote: post #220

pixl97 wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is exactly what full control means. Your lack of training is no excuse in the eyes of the law.

Well for example, in the U.K, neither understeer nor oversteer is taught when learning to drive. Whose fault is that? The 30 million drivers who have never heard of it or practised it, but have otherwise satisfied the legal requirement to drive; or the legislation that mandates the procedures that must be taken to pass a driving test?

In The Netherlands, you're not taught those things when learning to drive either. What is taught, is that wet and/or especially cold conditions can cause unsafe road conditions that can lead to loss of control over the vehicle. As a reasonable person, you're supposed to know to adapt to this. This isn't specifically mentioned in the law, but it follows from one of the most basic articles of our traffic law that states that it's "forbidden to act in a way that causes or could cause dangerous road conditions or causes or could cause traffic to be hindered"