this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2023
77 points (95.3% liked)

Fuck Cars

9642 readers
419 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
top 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Aidinthel@reddthat.com 46 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

So, the answer is basically "Because the city government decided they didn't want pedestrians to die, and acted accordingly."

[–] bstix@feddit.dk 22 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yes it's really that simple.

When Oslo and Helsinki achieved the same thing, it didn't start with people asking for visible crossings or bicycle lanes. It started with people voting in a government that promised to get rid of pedestrian deaths. The actual plans and design followed.

People might dismiss and argue for or against specific solutions, but I think we can all agree that pedestrian deaths are bad, so it shouldn't be difficult to get started, regardless of who is running the government.

[–] LibertyLizard 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The problem I’ve experienced in the US is that the local governments will voice support for this goal, claim they are pursuing it, but then just not implement really easy and basic solutions because of their fear of backlash.

[–] bstix@feddit.dk 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes, that's not US specific though. Politicians everywhere will promise everybody what they ask for and do nothing about it. Stuff like this is very localised, so it is a good idea to pay attention or even get involved with local politics, even if it's less exciting than the presidential election.

[–] Danksy@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

It is somewhat US specific since the US is more dependent on cars than a lot of European places for example. That makes it harder to make changes that impact car owners negatively.

[–] disposabletentacle@kbin.social 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

With a title like this, it's kind of disappointing that the answer is just "good infrastructure planning" and not something like "the land is cursed such that all who walk upon it shall rise again forever more."

[–] LibertyLizard 6 points 1 year ago

Haha I think it’s kind of exciting that it’s something so simple. It’s also something that I’ve been complaining about in my city for years, even before I got into urbanism. It’s just such an obviously good idea to ban parking on the corners.

Welcome to Europe