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

#241

Post by tremon » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 2:11 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…

> Bicycles have wheels, they should be on the streets.

But who is arguing that they shouldn't?

> [1] is very young

No it's not. Photo from 1926: http://www.rijwiel.net/fotos/foto001n.htm

> You're over optimizing for a small percentage of the population.

From the link [1] in my GP post: "Cycling accounts for 24 % of all commuter trips." That doesn't sound like a small percentage.

> You solve a lot by removing cars from the streets (think about underground parking lots) and giving way more space to walking lanes, hardly separated from wheeled vehicles (cars, public transport, motorbikes, bycicles, whatever...)

I'm unsure what you're arguing against. This is the bike-oriented city center of Den Haag: http://www.ditisdenhaag.nl/hofwegspui/

What would you change in that picture?

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

#242

Post by dsego » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 2:12 PM UTC

wycy wrote: post #147

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 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.

My old (first) croatian driver's license issued back in early 2000s had an expiry date in 2040-something I think, basically until retirement. The new one is only 10 years, so I have to renew it. I only got the new one because it's a plastic card that fits in my wallet (unlike the old booklet).

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

#243

Post by _ph_ » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 2:13 PM UTC

gavia1 wrote: post #210

ElKrist wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Honestly, you should never drive as fast to get under- or oversteer in normal traffic. The only exception would be icy road, but then you shouldn't drive more than walking speeds.

So step number 1. is not to drive as fast that you exceed the limits of your full control.

There is no step 2.

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

#244

Post by jkaplowitz » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 2:14 PM UTC

gavia1 wrote: post #210

ElKrist wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I just completed a new driver course in Quebec. They specifically space out the in-car sessions over a whole year to ensure this kind of practice. Yes, my instructor and I went on a highway while it was snowing with bad visibility.

We also get taught to inspect the car before getting in in case (for example) the exhaust pipe is blocked.

More training is needed in most countries.

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

#245

Post by dsfyu404ed » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 2:14 PM UTC

caconym_ wrote: post #199

u801e wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps this wouldn't be an issue if more intersections had a pedestrian scramble [1] phase. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedestrian_scramble

Where I live there is not a signal at every intersection. In some places there are not even any marked crosswalks anywhere nearby. However, every intersection that's not signaled/marked has implicit "unmarked crosswalks" and according to the law drivers must stop for pedestrians in these crosswalks. The vast majority of drivers seem to be ignorant of this law, or they just don't care. Enforcement is nonexistent. When…

>Maybe fancy urban planning can help, but it's a band-aid on a deeper problem, at least where I live: drivers are ignorant and have bad attitudes not suited for the responsibility of operating motor vehicles.

Which is more likely?

a) everyone is irresponsible

b) your definition of "responsible" is not in line with everyone else's

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

#246

Post by ElKrist » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 2:15 PM UTC

gavia1 wrote: post #210

ElKrist wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Perhaps not the best translation. It means that you have to adapt to the conditions and also for instance that driving with one hand because you have a cup of coffee, using your phone or having to manage a naughty pet that jumped to the front seat is not an acceptable excuse

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

#247

Post by consp » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 2:18 PM UTC

patriot1911 wrote: post #227

systemtest wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have hit a pedestrian. Instead of using the nearby crosswalk she walked in between the cars and when she walked in front of me it was too late for me to brake. She flew a couple of meters and landed on the crosswalk. In the police report is was stated that I hit the person on the crosswalk as I couldn't prove otherwise. The woman was taken away in an ambulance due to a broken leg. I was 16 at the time. Really shake…

> I was 16 at the time. I.e. you weren't driving a car and you were underage. I'm not saying that the legal system in The Netherlands is unreasonable or anything, but I feel like your case doesn't really represent the kind of case people are thinking of in this thread.

Why you are being downvoted is strange to me as it is a valid point to make. Low velocity hits with a pedestrian and a bike or moped without serious injuries are not something to give heavy fines to or involve the legal system as basic injuries are covered by general insurance and in this case the pedestrian was at least partially at fault. And otherwise the cost to society would be bigger than the medical and administrative. The parties have been helped and punished, don't make it worse than required.

Be aware though that this is not always the case. For instance if you are driving next to a playing field you are expected to watch out and brake for children who can always show up on the road and not doing so has consequences.

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

#248

Post by patriot1911 » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 2:18 PM UTC

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #233

patriot1911 wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It hasn't been less than 18 since 1934, if not further back. Since last year it's possible to get a provisional license at the age of 17 (no earlier).

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

#249

Post by systemtest » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 2:20 PM UTC

pindab0ter wrote: post #212

systemtest wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have hit a pedestrian. Instead of using the nearby crosswalk she walked in between the cars and when she walked in front of me it was too late for me to brake. She flew a couple of meters and landed on the crosswalk. In the police report is was stated that I hit the person on the crosswalk as I couldn't prove otherwise. The woman was taken away in an ambulance due to a broken leg. I was 16 at the time. Really shake…

How were you driving when you were sixteen?

I was driving a 49cc moped that I operated legally with a "bromfietscertificaat".

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

#250

Post by gavia1 » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 2:21 PM UTC

patriot1911 wrote: post #240

gavia1 wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 state…

Sure, that is the same here too.

The unfortunate truth is that people are human and humans make mistakes. You could drive to work on the same back road every day. Except one day it's particularly cold and you don't see the ice patch on the sharp right hand corner you've taken 100s of times before. The rear of the car steps out, but you don't know what to do as you have never encountered this before. You panic, naturally stamping on the brakes and end up off the road in a ditch.

The alternative: drivers must complete separate examinations for front wheel drive and rear driven cars, like how automatic and manual are separate licenses.

As part of that drivers must learn how the drivetrain affects how the car breaks traction both under power and under non-power conditions (i.e. coasting), and the appropriate corrections for both.

Let's come back to our scenario. We can assume the driver is operating a front wheel drive vehicle. Instead of slamming on the brakes, the driver has experience of lift off oversteer from their test. They apply 1/4 turn of opposite lock, then unwind the lock. The driver then applies power to the front wheels to straighten the rear.

Thanks to good training and examination driver has successfully avoided ending up the ditch.