Fuck Cars
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 Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don'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 topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do 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:
- [meta] for discussions/suggestions about this community itself
- [article] for news articles
- [blog] for any blog-style content
- [video] for video resources
- [academic] for academic studies and sources
- [discussion] for text post questions, rants, and/or discussions
- [meme] for memes
- [image] for any non-meme images
- [misc] for anything that doesn’t fall cleanly into any of the other categories
Recommended communities:
view the rest of the comments
The trouble is, if you set the speed limit below the 85% rule, more people are just going to speed anyway and there isn't enough police enforcement in the world to stop it (nor would you want there to be).
The design of the street has to change, in order to make the speed that drivers naturally want to travel lower.
What's funny is you could even keep the 85 percentile rule if you only changed the design of the street. If it's designed to drive at 30 then 85% of drivers will go 30.
Speed cameras?
Do you want a panopticon that fascists could use to surveil and persecute their political enemies? 'Cause that's how you get one.
Then you have people who briefly slow down for the camera, then speed back up.
You put multiple cameras on the road, and also check the time between sightings.
That's how Finland does a lot of rural highways, and I really like it. Basically, before an intersection/village, there will be a sign that shows the speed limit going down, and it warns you of the upcoming camera, so naturally, everyone actually does slow down in those high-risk areas, which are usually only a couple hundred meters.
@grue @Davriellelouna which is great if roads only exist for motorists (in England, they're also there for pedestrians, horse riders, cyclists, and I assume driving (of animals) is still allowed)
I don't understand what point you're trying to make. If they take a wide, straight road that people are comfortably doing 50 mph on and then lower the speed limit to 25 mph to make it "safe" for pedestrians, horse riders, cyclists, etc., people are just going to keep doing 50 mph anyway and mow down those vulnerable road users.
Changing the speed limit, by itself, does fuck-all to make the road more accommodating for non-car users. The road has to actually be made scarier or less comfortable for drivers via things like narrowed lanes, chicanes, speed tables, etc. in order to actually get drivers to slow down to the point where other road users are actually safe.
If the road is narrow and visibly winding with lots of trees close by, you bet those cars would slow down just to not wreck themselves. All while everyone else can use the road as normal.