this post was submitted on 30 Dec 2023
142 points (66.1% liked)

Fuck Cars

9666 readers
82 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] WoahWoah@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

"The driver inches into the crosswalk, watching the oncoming traffic to his left and waiting for a gap to appear. He finally spots one and accelerates into the turn"

Um, what? There are cars zooming across the crosswalk, which definitely wouldn't have a crossing signal. In this imaginary scenario, a pedestrian is trying to sprint across an intersection against a crossing signal.

There are enough horrific traffic situations created by cars and urban congestion, do we really need to make up a stupid and unlikely one where the pedestrian is the idiot? If anything, this article should be against right on green. Good luck with that.

[–] schrodingers_dinger@lemmy.world 29 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I think the article means that a pedestrian is trying to cross in front of the turning car where the pedestrian does have right of way, so perpendicular to the turning car and parallel with the traffic which has the green light and walk signal.

[–] WoahWoah@lemmy.world -5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Why would there be a "gap" in that case? It's just a poor example.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca -2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Oh my god. What a waste of time it was berating you. Might as well try to educate a rock.

[–] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I think you need to read the example again, slowly

[–] tooclose104@lemmy.ca 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Sweet mercy, bless your hearts. This example is clear and you both seem to be the problem.

The car it's talking about is at a red light, intending to turn right while there is active vehicle traffic proceeding through (the lanes with the green light). There are cross walks at this intersection, as there typically are in non-rural intersections. So the car (or truck, no judgement), which is facing a red light and intending on turning right before their light goes green, inches forward entering the crosswalk that is facing the green lights. They do this so the driver can watch the oncoming traffic proceeding through the green light. They are watching for a gap in that traffic in which they can slip into, during their intended right turn. This brings the car through 2 of the 4 crosswalks. 1 where a would pedestrian has the right of way, the other does not. The primary hazard here is that this driver, the one at the red light and wanting to turn right, is likely not paying any attention to anything on the right. Which could have a pedestrian entering the crosswalk, as is their right of way, and increases the likelihood of an accident where the car is at fault. A concern of this behaviour is the driver blocking access to the crosswalk which, where pedestrians have right of way. This is inconvenient to the pedestrian and can again put them into a hazardous situation of forcing them closer to oncoming traffic to walk around the offending car.

If that hasn't cleared it up for you and you drive a vehicle, please stop driving.

[–] WoahWoah@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I refuse to read your post. It's too long. And I'm going to keep driving my F350 wherever I damn well please, because this is America. Don't let the American flags slap your snowflake face and make you cry as I go by.

Don't mind the eagles, they're mine, I use them to hunt immigrants with my tank, which is my second car, and is a god-given right protected by the constitution. If it wasn't for the founding fathers protecting our right to drive tanks, the nazis would have won 'nam.

You sheeple disgust me.

[–] tooclose104@lemmy.ca 2 points 10 months ago

Too long, didn't read.

Opened aggressive, going to send my army of beavers and moose. Good luck.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca -3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Dude. It fucking happens. People die. It's not hard to find out. Don't rely on your own thought experiments when there is actual fucking data at your fingertips.