Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Peanut President
Nov 5, 2008

by Athanatos
its wild how hitting someone with a car isn't considered a crime but if you do it to a cop it's assault with a deadly weapon

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Ham Equity
Apr 16, 2013

The first thing we do, let's kill all the cars.
Grimey Drawer

Pepe Silvia Browne posted:

cars aren't weapons
therefore if you kill someone with a car, it must be an accident
QED

Unless you're a piece of poo poo pig motherfucker, in which case a parked car without the engine running is a weapon.

BIG-DICK-BUTT-FUCK
Jan 26, 2016

by Fluffdaddy


thats more like it

BIG-DICK-BUTT-FUCK
Jan 26, 2016

by Fluffdaddy

Cup Runneth Over posted:

"became enraged about Hrabolowski’s driving" is code for "was almost murdered by Hrabolowski using his car"


key word.

the cyclist in the video was literally slammed to the ground, you gotta defend yourself at that point .. not even on some macho bullshit but for fear of ending up dead or paralyzed. or you can just do nothing, reinforce the "cyclists are sissies" stereotype, and embolden other motorists

Pittsburgh Fentanyl Cloud
Apr 7, 2003


BIG-DICK-BUTT-gently caress posted:

key word.

the cyclist in the video was literally slammed to the ground, you gotta defend yourself at that point .. not even on some macho bullshit but for fear of ending up dead or paralyzed. or you can just do nothing, reinforce the "cyclists are sissies" stereotype, and embolden other motorists

The driver flipped out on him for filtering to the light too. That’s all it took. The cyclist filtered to the light because another cyclist had died on that same stretch of road a few months before in a squeeze crash.

Pryor on Fire
May 14, 2013

they don't know all alien abduction experiences can be explained by people thinking saving private ryan was a documentary

They passed a state? law here a few years back that says you have to give cyclists 3 feet of space or more when passing, and they put up signs everywhere informing everyone about the new law.

The next week the sheriff said there's no way we can enforce this law in any situation because we can't measure the passing gap in real time. I don't think it has ever been enforced since. Even the smallest bit of protection for bikes or peds will just be completely ignored by the police and the feckless bike neoliberals will never push back against this.

I pass by two white ghost bikes on my commute, it's just carnage all the time.

Deadly Ham Sandwich
Aug 19, 2009
Smellrose

Pryor on Fire posted:

The next week the sheriff said there's no way we can enforce this law in any situation because we can't measure the passing gap in real time. I don't think it has ever been enforced since. Even the smallest bit of protection for bikes or peds will just be completely ignored by the police and the feckless bike neoliberals will never push back against this.

Cops will be lazy about enforcing the law. You usually have to cajole them into doing their job. I know Houston cops were eventually cajoled into enforcing that bike 3 foot law. I've witnessed bicycle cops do busts on this a few times. Cop hops on a bike with a measuring laser, and when a car passes him too close, they signal another cop car down the road to pull them over. They would do this in any area with too many complaints about dangerous driving. Honestly, the laser measurement is unnecessary. Cops eyeball poo poo all the time.

Also lol that the story about a bicyclist shooting a driver has a link to a guy shooting clay disks from a bicycle. I need to bike with a shotgun.

Cat Puke
Apr 15, 2017
Does anyone make panniers out of old propane tanks? I think the implied hazard would help generate space.

Sphyre
Jun 14, 2001

Pepe Silvia Browne
Jan 1, 2007

ya know, gently caress it, sounds good

mystes
May 31, 2006

Pepe Silvia Browne posted:

ya know, gently caress it, sounds good
Surprise, it seems like it was a lie and you can't actually walk to walmart from there because the sidewalk disappears and then there's a completely insane intersection: https://goo.gl/maps/1H9jaHHmYt2cpJ986

The sign is gone in the latest street view imagery but it's there if you look at November 2016.

Pepe Silvia Browne
Jan 1, 2007

mystes posted:

It seems like it was a lie and you can't actually walk to walmart from there: https://goo.gl/maps/1H9jaHHmYt2cpJ986

The sign is gone in the latest street view imagery but it's there if you look at November 2016.

can one thing in this life not be a lovely loving lie

Atrocious Joe
Sep 2, 2011

Zerg Mans posted:

I'm gonna assume the driver didn't go to jail?

quote:

Bolognone said the driver had blown a red light and proceeded straight in a turning lane at an intersection she claimed pedestrians and bicyclists don’t have enough time to cross. The driver, a 26-year-old man, was cited for disobeying lane markings, police said.

Bolognone said she hopes “people are listening” and that city officials will consider implementing “safety changes” at the “dangerous intersection” and others throughout Chicago.
https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/2...-keep-happening

I assume at least some people in the militant bicyclist rights groups are also prison abolitionists which could explain why no one is talking about wanting more charges

mystes
May 31, 2006

It absolutely SHOULD be possible to walk to that walmart from that location though but I guess it's typical for the US that it isn't

cool av
Mar 2, 2013

what sort of creatures inhabit this landscape, I wonder?

Xaris
Jul 25, 2006

Lucky there's a family guy
Lucky there's a man who positively can do
All the things that make us
Laugh and cry

cool av posted:

what sort of creatures inhabit this landscape, I wonder?


freedom creatures who are free.

for real loving lol

Pryor on Fire
May 14, 2013

they don't know all alien abduction experiences can be explained by people thinking saving private ryan was a documentary

https://twitter.com/megankimble/status/1519725866938417153

Traffic engineers: We tried the sign thing! what else do you expect us to do?

Atrocious Joe
Sep 2, 2011

i think a lot of people in the US want to die without obviously committing suicide, and giving them ways to do that is probably a bad idea

ate shit on live tv
Feb 15, 2004

by Azathoth

Electro-Boogie Jack posted:

a bus equipped with pdc turrets that detect incoming drivers and neutralize them before they can hit the bus would be a good start

Better idea, ban all cars from whatevre streets+cross streets the bus is using.

More succintly:

quote:

Ban all cars

ate shit on live tv
Feb 15, 2004

by Azathoth

mystes posted:

If faster acceleration is such a problem maybe there should also be restrictions on that, although lol at trying to get that passed

Faster acceleration isn't a problem at all. This all comes down to the liberal solution to any social problem.

The necessity of cars in our society is the problems, not the specific mechanics of how cars function.

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN
Jun 26, 2009



cool av posted:

what sort of creatures inhabit this landscape, I wonder?



alien intelligence: appears to be a prison planet where metallic wardens keep soft evil flesh creatures in their enclosures

Ferdinand Bardamu
Apr 30, 2013
No Golden Corral. 2/10

OBAMNA PHONE
Aug 7, 2002
I love this YouTube channel because the crashes are great but the best part is that the constant crashes simply can’t be solved and must continue

https://youtu.be/XdQxgw2t7Vo

https://youtu.be/-eLcXaMe_J0

Xaris
Jul 25, 2006

Lucky there's a family guy
Lucky there's a man who positively can do
All the things that make us
Laugh and cry

Pryor on Fire posted:

https://twitter.com/megankimble/status/1519725866938417153

Traffic engineers: We tried the sign thing! what else do you expect us to do?
rofl no way.

Horace
Apr 17, 2007

Gone Skiin'

cool av posted:

what sort of creatures inhabit this landscape, I wonder?



everything in its own self contained little box. I had some of these micro machines clip-together buildings as a child, I never realised they were so accurate.

mystes
May 31, 2006

ate poo poo on live tv posted:

Faster acceleration isn't a problem at all. This all comes down to the liberal solution to any social problem.

The necessity of cars in our society is the problems, not the specific mechanics of how cars function.
You realize that lots of other countries that are less car dependent already also have restrictions on various aspects of cars (e.g. size which prevents people from driving massive trucks), right?

We need our infrastructure to be less car dependent but, no, we absolutely should restrict any aspect of the operation of cars that makes them seem overly convenient or fun to abuse by doing dumb poo poo like racing at the cost of safety, including maximum speed and acceleration.

The idea that you can only make infrastructure less car dependent but you aren't allowed to regulate the function of cars at all (despite the fact that we have maximum speeds for things like ebikes that are much less dangerous) is some weird libertarian American brain poison.

The only reason speed and acceleration aren't commonly restricted is that it would inconvenience drivers, even though it would massively improve safety for pedestrians.

mystes has issued a correction as of 12:51 on Apr 30, 2022

Norton
Feb 18, 2006

Pryor on Fire posted:

Traffic engineers: We tried the sign thing! what else do you expect us to do?

20 years ago i drove across texas and it was a very boring drive but your post reminded me that they had tons of stupid signs all over the highway. i can't find a picture but there was one type that said "observe road signs". as if someone noticed people weren't obeying the signs so their solution was to make more signs that told people to read the other signs. i'm sure it was like a million dollars to put all those stupid things up across the entire state and there is a 0% chance they helped anyone.

ate shit on live tv
Feb 15, 2004

by Azathoth

mystes posted:

You realize that lots of other countries that are less car dependent already also have restrictions on various aspects of cars (e.g. size which prevents people from driving massive trucks), right?
No country has restrictions on maximum acceleration or realistically the speed of a car either and why would they? Size/weight license restrictions exist, even in America, but the top-end is like 10,000lbs and I think manufacturer's can get federal waivers to keep them legal, for example RV's. But that has nothing to do with pedestrian safety because the weight of a vehicle is completely moot when you are talking about vehicle/pedestrian collisions.

I'd be interested in what country even has a size limit that would prevent a Cadillac SUV from being driven on it's roads.

Basically all the dumbass "common sense" poo poo this thread spews would do nothing AT BEST for pedestrian safety because fundamentally the problems with cars are that they exist in places where people are and we have designed our society around them.

mystes
May 31, 2006

ate poo poo on live tv posted:

But that has nothing to do with pedestrian safety because the weight of a vehicle is completely moot when you are talking about vehicle/pedestrian collisions.
https://medium.com/sidewalk-talk/the-troubling-tie-between-bigger-cars-and-pedestrian-deaths-c82a0ee8dc0b

quote:

For the average U.S. metro area, a 100 kilogram increase in vehicle size corresponded to a statistically significant 2.4 percent increase in pedestrian fatalities.


ate poo poo on live tv posted:

Basically all the dumbass "common sense" poo poo this thread spews would do nothing AT BEST for pedestrian safety because fundamentally the problems with cars are that they exist in places where people are and we have designed our society around them.
This is a straw man argument, I am saying we need to do both things.

I wonder why you are saying this stuff? Hmm...

ate poo poo on live tv posted:

Cars should be for leisure or road-tripping exclusively. gently caress commuting for work.
If you think cars should be for "leisure" you may be one of the many car brained people who claim to hate cars but really just just want OTHER drivers off the road to clear the way for your joy riding.... Maybe that's why you don't want vehicle speed limited? There's no logical reason not to limit it when there's no reason to go over 70mph ever. Tons of accidents are caused by idiots racing cars at 100+mph and limiting car speed would immediately fix that. That doesn't mean we don't need to change our infrastructure to be less car dependent, but the fact that we need to be less car dependent doesn't mean we also shouldn't restrict cars.

mystes has issued a correction as of 15:28 on Apr 30, 2022

Junkozeyne
Feb 13, 2012

ate poo poo on live tv posted:

No country has restrictions on maximum acceleration or realistically the speed of a car either and why would they? Size/weight license restrictions exist, even in America, but the top-end is like 10,000lbs and I think manufacturer's can get federal waivers to keep them legal, for example RV's. But that has nothing to do with pedestrian safety because the weight of a vehicle is completely moot when you are talking about vehicle/pedestrian collisions.

I'd be interested in what country even has a size limit that would prevent a Cadillac SUV from being driven on it's roads.

Basically all the dumbass "common sense" poo poo this thread spews would do nothing AT BEST for pedestrian safety because fundamentally the problems with cars are that they exist in places where people are and we have designed our society around them.

There's a 1997 NHTSA report that finds reducing the weight of light trucks by 100pounds would reduce pedestrian/bike/motorbike fatalities by 2.03%.

Your post history in this thread is making poo poo up and ignoring actual real world statistics when they get brought up because they don't conform to your world view.

Fitzy Fitz
May 14, 2005




https://twitter.com/zhang_heqing/status/1519898637744156672?t=DnWNUwPjPqwTeo0Qe_YcGQ&s=19

Boywhiz88
Sep 11, 2005

floating 26" off da ground. BURR!
Yeah, reducing thousands of pounds helps with stopping or at least reducing overall kinetic force.

withak
Jan 15, 2003


Fun Shoe

This speed bump is not effective against pickup trucks.

ate shit on live tv
Feb 15, 2004

by Azathoth

Boywhiz88 posted:

Yeah, reducing thousands of pounds helps with stopping or at least reducing overall kinetic force.

Oh I think we absolutely should do that and car companies, if they need to exist, should be incentivized to make their cars as lightweight as possible.

mystes posted:

https://medium.com/sidewalk-talk/the-troubling-tie-between-bigger-cars-and-pedestrian-deaths-c82a0ee8dc0b

If you think cars should be for "leisure" you may be one of the many car brained people who claim to hate cars but really just just want OTHER drivers off the road to clear the way for your joy riding.... Maybe that's why you don't want vehicle speed limited?


This is a great study, but it's using vehicle weight as a proxy for bigger SUV's killing pedestrians, as you can see in the next line "The impact of light trucks (again: SUVs, pick-ups, and minivans) was even more significant. In an average metro area, for every 10 percent of vehicles that rose in size to light trucks, there was a 3.6 percent increase in the pedestrian fatality rate." and I already think SUVs should be banned immediately.

As far as leisure, yes, cars should be exclusively for leisure, and if you commute by car, gently caress you. I haven't commuted by car since before 2009 and don't ever plan on doing it again. I've driven less then 30miles this year and I don't cop-out by ubering everywhere either. What I do is race my s2000 on a track, often times at speeds exceeding 100mph, more people should do that with their car, as it is the only acceptable usage of cars. You can also auto-cross if you wish, that will keep speeds <40mph most of the time.

mystes
May 31, 2006

ate poo poo on live tv posted:

Oh I think we absolutely should do that and car companies, if they need to exist, should be incentivized to make their cars as lightweight as possible.

This is a great study, but it's using vehicle weight as a proxy for bigger SUV's killing pedestrians, as you can see in the next line "The impact of light trucks (again: SUVs, pick-ups, and minivans) was even more significant. In an average metro area, for every 10 percent of vehicles that rose in size to light trucks, there was a 3.6 percent increase in the pedestrian fatality rate." and I already think SUVs should be banned immediately.
I have absolutely no idea what your point is then. You claimed that there was no effect on pedestrian fatalities from weight and now you're objecting to this study which disproves that because it doesn't specifically distinguish between size and weight, which would basically be impossible because they're so strongly correlated. You object to restricting weight but you think SUVs should be immediately banned while being incentivized to be as lightweight as possible? What exactly are you trying to say here?

quote:

As far as leisure, yes, cars should be exclusively for leisure, and if you commute by car, gently caress you. I haven't commuted by car since before 2009 and don't ever plan on doing it again. I've driven less then 30miles this year and I don't cop-out by ubering everywhere either. What I do is race my s2000 on a track, often times at speeds exceeding 100mph, more people should do that with their car, as it is the only acceptable usage of cars. You can also auto-cross if you wish, that will keep speeds <40mph most of the time.
Feel free to drive your car on a track at speeds over 100mph but that absolutely shouldn't be street legal and giving this as an argument against speed governors on street legal cars is just stupid.

It sounds like you have massive carbrain and are just in denial about that.

mystes has issued a correction as of 16:54 on Apr 30, 2022

Pittsburgh Fentanyl Cloud
Apr 7, 2003


As it is the cops here don’t enforce traffic laws at all anymore and every time I go out I see speed racer stuff. Last Saturday I saw some guy in a Charger shoot right across two lanes of traffic to use an on ramp + gore zone to pass at high speed. Would be nice if we didn’t sell people 400 horsepower cars to do that poo poo.

ate shit on live tv
Feb 15, 2004

by Azathoth

mystes posted:

I have absolutely no idea what your point is then. You claimed that there was no effect on pedestrian fatalities from weight and now you're objecting to this study which disproves that because it doesn't specifically distinguish between size and weight, which would basically be impossible because they're so strongly correlated. You object to restricting weight but you think SUVs should be immediately banned while being incentivized to be as lightweight as possible? What exactly are you trying to say here?

Feel free to drive your car on a track at speeds over 100mph but that absolutely shouldn't be street legal and giving this as an argument against speed governors on street legal cars is just stupid.

It sounds like you have massive carbrain and are just in denial about that.

I never said I was against weight limits or "any" regulation. That was something you made up. I am still wondering what country has "size" limits for their cars? as you referenced here:

mystes posted:

You realize that lots of other countries that are less car dependent already also have restrictions on various aspects of cars (e.g. size which prevents people from driving massive trucks), right?

What I am against is dumbass, sincere suggestions like "governors" or whatever dumb technical solution to a social problem liberals like to come up with.

Pittsburgh Fentanyl Cloud
Apr 7, 2003


Cars as they exist now are a dumb technical solution to let humans move at over 130 mph. Makes u think

mystes
May 31, 2006

ate poo poo on live tv posted:

I never said I was against weight limits or "any" regulation. That was something you made up. I am still wondering what country has "size" limits for their cars? as you referenced here:
I had heard that Europe has limits on the weight of vehicles that you can drive with a normal drivers licenses (with another class of license for slightly heavier vehicles) and I thought that it was low enough to exclude more of the heaviest American SUVs, but it seems like unfortunately it's high enough to only exclude maybe the single heaviest pickup truck in the US. However I would definitely support limiting the weight of passenger cars to something much lower so I'm very glad you aren't against that.

I also heard that some countries have restrictions on the maximum speed heavier cars can go at though, and people were saying that this would apply to some American SUVs if they were imported, but I don't know exactly what to search for and I'm having trouble confirming this, so I'm not sure if it's true or not.

I still have absolutely no idea whatsoever your actual point was, though, since you are saying that you aren't against weight restrictions?

quote:

What I am against is dumbass, sincere suggestions like "governors" or whatever dumb technical solution to a social problem liberals like to come up with.
I'm not sure that "liberals" want to install governors in cars, and banning SUVs and redesigning roads are also "technical solutions to a social problem," but really, excellent attempt to frame any attempts to fix car dependence as a "liberal" thing (whereas real leftists like you want to go vroom vroom in their expensive toys). It's very clear that you have incurable car brain so I suggest you admit that to yourself and go buy an SUV.

mystes has issued a correction as of 18:02 on Apr 30, 2022

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Doc Hawkins
Jun 15, 2010

Dashing? But I'm not even moving!


a liberal solution would be like, torque taxes, or a tax credit when you buy a car with a 0-60 slower than some number. or maybe just per cylinder?

i'm forcing myself to stop thinking about this now.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply