this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2025
63 points (93.2% liked)
Fuck Cars
13514 readers
694 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 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:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Better drive, then...
Now, earnestly:
Could this just be a translation error? There is also another slight semantic error in there, if I'm not mistaken (be/get).
"You could be killed" is fine. (Edit: "you may be killed" is also fine. My error misquoting.)
I don't believe this is a mistaken attempt to warn against drunk driving.
I think it's an alternative warning about a different danger, from people going out to drink, getting too drunk to make safe decisions, and staggering home down the middle of the street, whereupon they are run over by vehicles.
The drivers of which may also be drunk, or perhaps just unwary, as they round a bend and encounter an unforseen person who then dodges the wrong way or not at all.
There's also a danger of passing out in the middle of the road, cosplaying as roadkill until you become it, but that's more of a vodka problem.
Be/get: interesting, I thought there to be a major difference (one describing a state already in, the other the process leading there).
.
What bugs me for this interpretation, is that the warning about drunk driving would then be completely missing. That doesn't make sense somehow.
Some states/countries have an assortment of warnings to choose from, like with cigarettes. The font is large so you don't have to put all of them. An average drinker sees them all eventually.
This actually sounds plausible.
We also have the cigarettes thing.
(But alcohol are standard warnings: pregnancy, age restrictions - no driving warnings interestingly)