this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2024
597 points (94.8% liked)

Fuck Cars

9682 readers
43 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
 

Edit: to clarify: the message in the ad is actually ironic/satirical, mocking the advice for cyclists to wear high-viz at night.

It uses the same logic but inverts the parts and responsabilities, by suggesting to motorists (not cyclists) to apply bright paint on their cars.

So this ad is not pro or against high-viz, it's against victim blaming

Cross-posted from: https://mastodon.uno/users/rivoluzioneurbanamobilita/statuses/113544508246569296

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

That bimmer looks sick

Not sure if the intended message is really coming through...

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Because if too many people and things use hi-viz, that will make it regular-viz.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 8 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Bikes have lights on them too.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 hours ago

Unless you're in the Netherlands, where 2/3rds of the bikes will have the shitty "this is legally a light" LEDs from the convenience shops... Oh, and 2/3rds of those will be either out of battery, or installed facing the wrong way.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

When I'm on the road, I want to be visible. On my red motorcycle I wear a bright yellow helmet and a jacket with hi-viz strips. The problem is that car manufacturers only offer boring colors and charge an exorbitant fee for a cool color if they offer them at all.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

You're missing the point.

Its saying not killing cyclists is the job of the people who would be killing cyclists. Its saying operating dangerous heavy machinery is a privilege and it comes with responsibilities. A cyclist us never to blame for a car hitting a cyclist. It is always always always the drivers fault, because they chose to drive a car.

In my opinion a much too common privilege with responsibilities we dont take near seriously enough.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 25 minutes ago (1 children)

A cyclist us never to blame for a car hitting a cyclist. It is always always always the drivers fault, because they chose to drive a car.

That's an insane take, right? If I as a cyclist blindly ride across a road directly in front of a heavy vehicle, surely it's on me. In what way would that be the heavy vehicle drivers fault?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 17 minutes ago* (last edited 10 minutes ago)

If my lover breaks my jaw in anger, thats not my fault.

Under no conditions is that my fault, and youre a terrible person if you say it is.

If an adult beats the shit out of a young child, that is, in no circumstance, the child's fault. Youre a terrible fucking person if you say it is.

You can say its not the abusive parent's fault and blame structural issues or whatever, and maybe thats fair sometimes, but still pretty suspicious.

This is like that. Cars are violent, they are inefficient, and they are a choice. You choose to (statistically) sacrifice innocents every time you get behind the wheel. Everything you do while driving is on you. Or possibly the civil engineers and lawmakers who created the situation. Do not blame the victim. The victim is not at fault for having been hurt, for cracking your windshield and stealing bits of safety glass with their face. Under no conditions is a victim at fault. You are at fault for hurting them.

Unless they hacked your car and remotely piloted it to kill them in some sort of elaborate suicide/frame-up, and you literally did not have control of the vehicle. In which case I'd still put some of the responsibility on you, because you put the weapon where they could get it, loaded it, and got in.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

Cars should be bright as fuck. A bright red, orange, green, or yellow car stands out way more than the black, white, beige and gray shit that dominates the road.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 12 hours ago (4 children)

It's funny, but as a driver and a cyclist, the amount of times I barely saw the person on the bike, because they had no hi viz, no lights and no reflectors (and black/dark clothing), even in moderately good visibility conditions is too damn high.

It's not that big of a deal in cities, but I'd be really pushing it to ride my bike out on a 70+ kmph road, and you'd have to hold me at gunpoint to do it without any lights, because I'd be as good as dead anyway.

Of course black cars are kinda the same, except here in Poland every car is required by law to have at least position lights on at all times (yes, sunny daylight too), and it makes a world of a difference no matter the paint color.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

We have daylight running laws here as well, but those lights are different than the regular headlights and weaker.

In driving school they taught me to just put on my regular lights all the time.

They're a lot stronger than the daylight ones and make you more visible

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 hours ago

I think any bike intended for road use should be equipped with lights

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I prefer when all people occupying the road, whether its a pedestrian, cyclist, motorcyclist, car, or horse rider be as visible as possible.

Its why I refuse to drive a gray or silver car. They blend in with the pavement at certain times in the am and pm and if it's raining really hard they disappear. In a lot of ways they are worse than black cars.

What's wrong with making sure you are visible? Why is that something to make fun of? (I'm not asking you directly, I just don't get the joke in the ad.)

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 hours ago

also grey and silver are boring as fuck

[–] [email protected] 8 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

I'd even argue (this is what the Internet is for) that gray cars in rain are the absolute worst. They just disappear without any kind of lights on. I don't know why we don't just have headlights and taillights on all the time. It's how I've driven for the past 15 years, to me it just makes sense. I'm never caught forgetting to put them on when it's raining or when it's dark, because they are always on. I like people to see me, I do not want to be involved in a collision.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

They just disappear without any kind of lights on

My area has a law where you must have lights on when raining

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

The funny part is that it is actually "headlights on when wipers required", which is quite strange. When I am in heavy rain and I have a freshly rainx'ed winshield, I don't even need wipers. But I still need lights

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

Here in Spain is much simpler, if it's cloudy lights go on. Anything besides a blue sky basically means lights on. Its way easier since you just always have them on and that's basically it.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (4 children)

I get the sentiment here but as I'll always say the car wins.

You can't call it a death machine and then act like it's not one.

Cars have lights built in. Humans don't. Wear the fucking highvis and save your life.

Either that or start wearing light strips all over yourself.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Your standard bicycle has light too? If it's about being the safest cyclist possible, you'd also need a loud siren declaring that a bicycle is on the road. At some point it is ridiculous how many non-mandatory rules you need to follow until drivers accept that they are to blame for the crash, how about we stick to the actual laws and people who can't see a vehicle fitted with reflectors and lights get off the road.

Hint: seeing the lights on a bicycle is easier when your wind shield isn't 2 meters of the ground.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

Your standard bicycle has light too

No it doesn't. It has reflectors but not actual lighting. I've almost hit a few cyclists who relied only on the reflectors on the wheels, front peg, and rear peg.

Hint: seeing the lights on a bicycle is easier when your wind shield isn't 2 meters of the ground.

I'm not arguing pro cars here. My point is keep yourself fuckin safe. Don't be stupid just because "bUt CaRs ArE tHe PrObLeM"

You can't say they're a problem and then act like they're not a problem.

Complain all you want it's perfectly valid. But do the shit you have to do to keep yourself the fuck alive.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Goddamn, forgot that the USA considers bikes as exercise machines.

Your standard commuter bike has lights, and is required by law to have it in most countries.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I personally prefer the option of equipping a comically bright headlight to the bike to emulate a lifted truck.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 9 hours ago

Congratulations! I'm now blind and have a legitimate reason to run you over.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Okay but hear me out here, we design streets where bikes and cars don't have to share a lane. Crazy idea i know.

We should design streets for the cyclists and drivers we have, not the ones we want.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 hours ago

Fair point that roads should be designed a lot better, but in the mean time, if you're going to be driving on roads that got put down originally 50 years ago without cycling paths and no lights in the middle of farmland. Wear the high Viz gear or make sure you have working lights and reflectors.

[–] [email protected] 56 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

The satire misses the mark since cars already have strict mandatory visibility requirements by law. In the EU, you must have working headlights, brake lights, turn signals, daytime running lights (since 2011), fog lights, reverse lights, and reflectors. Driving without any of these gets you fined, points on your license, and fails vehicle inspection (TÜV/MOT). These aren't optional safety suggestions like cyclist hi-viz - they're legal requirements with real penalties.

I don't know about yankee laws...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Huh? Could you explain once more why this doesn't work?

Keep in mind that cycling also has a lot of visibility requirements, it is illegal to drive without lights at night, you need to have reflectors front, back, in the spokes and on the pedals. This also results in fines and points on your drivers license. Keep any remarks on enforcements for yourself, car drivers don't check or even fix their headlights the moment they break either as my last few drives showed me.

Comparing the optional wearing of hi-vis west to the optional painting cars a brighter colour makes sense when the goal is to mock the immediate question "well, was the cyclist wearing hi-vis?" that always seem to pop up when a crash happens.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

You can't make stupid people safe. I drive home in the dark now and I typically see at least one person driving with their lights turned completely off per day.

I also knew one guy who had a light that didn't work but his highbeams did, so he just used his highbeams 100% of the time. When I told him he was being dangerous he said something to the effect of "I'm not going to jeopardize my safety for some rando on the road". And was legitimately confused why I would want to put him in danger, and upset that people kept flashing their beams back at him. Some people have absolutely no desire to be a functioning member of society.

Edit: and that's completely ignoring the idiots who go in the complete opposite direction and use cheapo light bars they got off amazon that are 600x brighter than led headlights on urban roads. I hope there is a special place in hell for them.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 hours ago

"You can't make stupid people safe."

🤣

[–] [email protected] 7 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

State dependent. Maryland for example legally requires a front headlamp and a rear reflector in low visibility conditions. Also must have a bell or horn but can't have a siren (?).

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

It's less state dependent than you think. The feds have the last say in the safety equipment that comes on your car from the factory. They write the regulations on safety equipment for all highway vehicles.

What is interesting is that the NFPA, (the US National Fire Prevention Association), which writes the guidance for US public safety departments, has learned that you can have too much flashy-flashies and woo-woos and sparkles hanging on your vehicle. We used to hang as much as that stuff as we could on fire trucks and ambulances. Now, new rigs are toning it down to reflective chevrons and marker lights on the back end to prevent dazzling and confusing traffic as they approach a scene. The NFPA national tracking has shown a marked decline in tertiary accidents.

Reflectives and markers are important, but you can do too much can have worse outcomes because of it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 hours ago

I wish those laws were enforceable. I passed someone the other day whose car was completely covered in Christmas lights. I don't mean, "they had a lot of lights", I mean every square inch of the exterior was covered in blinky flashy lights.

It takes a special kind of stupid to think that is a good idea, and a special kind of police incompetence to allow it on the road.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 14 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 18 points 14 hours ago

Cars used to have lots of reflectors on them in the 1980 and 90's. Especially I'm the head and taillight clusters.

Cars should also be required to have high vis strips like commercial vehicles.

load more comments
view more: next ›