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

#201

Post by i_am_proteus » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 1:21 PM UTC

lukeqsee wrote: post #85

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.

In Europe, if you strike a pedestrian outside a crosswalk, the same might happen to you depending on the jurisdiction. Pedestrians create their own right of way, practically speaking (if not judicially). :-)

This may be true in Western Europe. In Russia, the de facto law is that cars have the right of way, a holdover from Soviet days, when only politicians and top bureaucrats were afforded cars.

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

#202

Post by bad-joke » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 1:21 PM UTC

nmeofthestate wrote: post #60

Lio wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds shocking if you only travel in car as it doesn't affect you as much but if you ride a bike it's a fact of life in many areas. For example if you wear lycra, you will probably find that a percentage of people will regularly try to "punish" you because they think you "look funny". The mildest form of punishment will be them driving as close to you as they dare. That could be 50mph 12"s away. That's like stand…

I've cycled for decades and never had such an incident of aggression from drivers. Maybe it depends on some other factors in addition to the drivers.

To counter your anecdote, cyclist deaths have risen lately in NYC to the point of public protest:

> Aster Ryan, 25, of Wingate, said “this summer has felt especially dangerous.” In addition to the three cycling deaths that took place within a week, Ryan said she was hit while riding her bike a little more than a week ago on Dean Street, and also watched another rider get hit by an opening car door recently.

https://www.amny.com/transit/cyclist-die-in-washington-squar...

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

#203

Post by bluGill » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 1:21 PM UTC

coredog64 wrote: post #133

> Those who walk or bike to work receive no commuter tax benefit False. It’s possible to pay for mass transit with pretax dollars.

Is that in a theoretical sense, or is it something I could do now? If the latter can you be more specific - how do I use pre-tax dollars to pay for my bus fare?

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

#204

Post by bluGill » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 1:24 PM UTC

inflatableDodo wrote: post #14

devoply wrote: post #4

Not just the legal system but also the city planners who designed all sorts of things like suburbs, malls, etc. that favour cars and are pretty much copy-pasta all over each city on the whole continent. All these people want bike lanes, I want my horse lane.

I want the majority of the road network roofed with turf into a long hill with occaisional exits, or lowered and moved completely underground.

I've concluded the opposite: leave the cars where they are. What I want is a separate pedestrian level to the city - a skyway system (though I'm fine with it being underground). Let the humans walk in air conditioned comfort while not cars to worry about. This is much cheaper than the underground roads.

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

#205

Post by Spooky23 » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 1:25 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…

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.

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

#206

Post by anonu » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 1:26 PM UTC

> Those who walk or bike to work receive no commuter tax benefit

Its all about incentives. And the government is in the driver's seat. I would love to get paid to bike around - that is a brilliant idea. Not to mention the health benefits of having a population exercise to get to work.

I live in NYC where the city was designed for cars. I find it a travesty that prime waterfront property on both sides of Manhattan - really all around the island - is a highway. If Robert Moses had prioritized non-car means of transport, we would have a very different city.

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

#207

Post by hazeii » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 1:28 PM UTC

megablast wrote: post #22

Imagine if someone invented cars today? Hey everyone, we want to make you use this killing machine, that kills a million people every year around the world directly, many more indirectly. We just need to clear out the parks currently around your houses to turn into horrible bleak roads, so they can bring the pollution directly to your door.

It's a great thought. Just to make it more fun, let's fit the cars with tanks of inflammable liquid and then drive them really fast, like say 60mph, along the same roads in opposite directions at the same time!

What could possibly go wrong?

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

#208

Post by bluGill » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 1:29 PM UTC

lazyjones wrote: post #9

Yet another fantasy article that tries to suggest roads were built for "the car loving 1%ers of the 20s" and not for public transport and all kinds of other infrastructure needs, including the army's.

Roads before the car were mostly dirt. Humans can walk just fine on them. If they were paved it was probably cobblestones where are again fine for walkers but too rough for cars.

It isn't clear if bicycles or cars drove paved roads in the early days though: both need smooth surfaces to be useful. Bicycles started it first, but it isn't clear how much success they had.

The army's needs of roads came last. The Civil War was fought around railroads (and boats) for long distance travel, and horses for the rest. Only after WWII did the army really realize the advantages of cars and switch to that mode in their plans.

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

#209

Post by r3bl » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 1:31 PM UTC

Ygg2 wrote: post #174

PakG1 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mm, even if they "tried to not put their life in danger", they still wouldn't be putting your life in danger... simple physics.

By disregarding the laws, and forcing you to accommodate their behavior, they can still end up putting your life in danger. E.g. you drive on a road designed for relatively high speeds say 80-100 km/h. They decide to cross it, despite it not being a safe zone for crossing. You hit the pedals and swerve off the road injuring yourself (or you get rammed by a vehicle behind you).

Oh yeah, poor endangered drivers. Why does nobody think about them?

Injury =/= death. If you swerve off the road, you have airbags. If a car behind you hits you, again, you have airbags. You have tons of metal shielding you from a collision, insurance that is supposed to take care of the situations that can't be blamed on you, and airbags and seat belts that are supposed to reduce the consequences of a collision.

Pedestrians have none of that. Where I come from, this (alongside first-aid skills) is the very first thing you learn on your way of getting a driver's license, before road signs and traffic rules are even mentioned.

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

#210

Post by gavia1 » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 1:34 PM UTC

ElKrist wrote: post #127

lukeqsee wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Europe, if you strike a pedestrian outside a crosswalk, the same might happen to you depending on the jurisdiction. Pedestrians create their own right of way, practically speaking (if not judicially). :-)

A relative in France hit a pedestrian outside of a crosswalk, the aged man died after a few days at the hospital. It was night time, rainy and the victim popped out from the space between two parked cars and ran just in front of the motorbike to quickly cross the road. There was automatically a trial anyway for manslaughter and my relative was not found guilty of anything. I think it's a good thing to automatically h…

What do you mean by "full control"? The average driver does not have the experience nor the training to maintain full control at all times.

For example, consider a situation where the driver has to correct understeer, or lift-off oversteer, both relatively easy to achieve in cold, wet conditions.