this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2024
559 points (98.1% liked)

Fuck Cars

9591 readers
49 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
 

The new law permits pedestrians to cross a roadway at any point, including outside of a crosswalk. It also allows for crossing against traffic signals and specifically states that doing so is no longer a violation of the city’s administrative code. But the new law also warns that pedestrians crossing outside of a crosswalk do not have the right of way and that they should yield to other traffic that has the right of way.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

This is how Illinois has been for ages. The legal penalties for hitting a pedestrian are higher to compensate. And if you hit a construction worker you'd best hope you're rich, because that's a big-ass $10k fine on top of 10 years.

[–] TheRealCharlesEames@lemm.ee 124 points 1 week ago (25 children)

Insane it was ever made illegal.

load more comments (25 replies)
[–] VinesNFluff@pawb.social 72 points 1 week ago (3 children)

"Jaywalking" being a crime is such a fundamentally brainrot thing

The law here in Brazil, not that anyone follows it, but it basically follows the logic of "the smaller you are, the more of a right of way you have". I.e. theoretically, a car should ALWAYS stop or slow itself to save a pedestrian or cyclist or even a motorcyclist

.... Again, not that anyone follows it, but it IS on the paper.

[–] merde@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 week ago

the term used here is "vulnerable". Vulnerability gives you priority

[–] Mossheart@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 week ago

It would be nice if this was followed but the reality of the world is the opposite. It's right of weight, not right of way.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee 65 points 1 week ago (3 children)

How does one "legalize" walking? Jaywalking is an absurd concept to begin with.

[–] Boomkop3@reddthat.com 32 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Step 2. bring cars to the market before proper regulations were a thing
Step 3. aggressively lobby and market that it's the walkers fault for getting driven over
Step 4. actually win over public opinion somehow

[–] Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Racism. The Jays in jaywalking where probably immigrants with weird hats.

[–] Boomkop3@reddthat.com 2 points 6 days ago

Like halitosis, that term was coined in ads. Ads funded by car manufacturers

[–] Evotech@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago

Step 1: be American

[–] LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago (2 children)

There are plenty of places you're not allowed to walk for your own safety and the safety of others. It's not a crazy concept, although I do think that jaywalking should be legal

[–] model_tar_gz@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

“Right to Travel” == right to walk on and across an interstate freeway where 5000 lb death missiles are hurtling past me at 90 mi/hr.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] frank@sopuli.xyz 39 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Good, especially since the law just targets POC.

If car traffic became 50% worse to make walking traffic 5% better, that's a win for humans in the city. It'll help convince more people to use non-car methods of transportation and that helps spark people to vote for and invest in more non-car infrastructure.

Ditching cars in populated cities isn't a magic law or anything, it's a slow incremental burn; legalizing pedestrians walking strictly helps that

[–] SatouKazuma@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago (19 children)

Ditching cars should be done everywhere (not just in populated cities).

[–] yonder@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

At least in North America, around 80% of the population lives in a populated area. That means even if we only eliminate cars for urban areas, that's still most of the cars removed. The only way I see people in rural areas getting around without a car would be with electric cargo bikes and robust train routes.

[–] SatouKazuma@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

Buses would be the short term solution except for the really far out rural areas, during the time in which far out exurbs and suburbs are redesigned for maximum density.

[–] frank@sopuli.xyz 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Agree, but it's certainly easier to do in NYC than rural places in the US, so I advocate for starting there

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] EleventhHour@lemmy.world 39 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

In 28 years living in New York, the vast majority of my crossing the street is done between the blocks. Some of them are very long.

And New Yorkers cross the street like we own it because we know that anyone who hits us is gonna get their ass sued off and have to pay out ridiculous amounts of money.

[–] azl@lemmy.sdf.org 28 points 1 week ago

I support this law (fuck cars), but if you step into the street thinking an oncoming car won't destroy you like a pinata stuffed with ketchup packets, you have survived the luckiest lawsuit-free 28 years.

this really threw me when I first visited new york. I come from a place where you don't dare try that because you WILL get hit and the driver will likely get no consequences. seeing new yorkers just walk out into traffic without even looking was such a mindfuck

[–] metaStatic@kbin.earth 33 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The cemetery is full of people who had the right of way.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 95 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (8 children)
[–] SatouKazuma@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

This is great. Maybe I'm crazy, but I'm okay with violence against people who think their convenience takes priority over the safety of others.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] StarlightDust@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 1 week ago (2 children)

They were also fans of using it against left-wing protestors while ignoring the right doing it, particularly in the case of anti-genocide protests. I assume they will just find something new to pick people off in the crowd now.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] aceshigh@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago (3 children)

… it was illegal? No one has received a ticket for jaywalking in nyc.

[–] modus@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago

Adam Ruins Everything had an episode about jaywalking and how it became a crime.

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Are there ever any tickets for any sort of traffic violation of any sort in nyc?

[–] Joeffect@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Turning right on red apparently

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

I drive a delivery truck though nyc one day a week. I have unadulterated rage for the single passenger suvs that sit in the middle of intersections, causing gridlock cause they think they'll miss something by waiting their turn.

[–] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

No white people maybe.

load more comments
view more: next ›