Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
Top-level
Sully1503

@stux The alternative was people getting killed, which was happening when cars first started to hit the road. What’s interesting, car manufacturers invented the term “Jay-walking.” But having lived in a city where there is almost no traffic separation….I’ll keep what we currently have. Even if you got all cars off the road, you’d still have traffic separation for public transportation.

8 comments
Sieva 🚴🚇🏙️🌹

@sully1503 @stux Public transportation doesn't take nearly as much space as private vehicles do.

Sully1503

@Anibyl @stux It does, when considering transportation saturation. Especially, if you want it running on time. I am all for getting rid of cars, but stop with the MAGAesque arguments.

Sieva 🚴🚇🏙️🌹

@sully1503 @stux
“public transport (PT) and non-motorized transport (NMT) can be up to 20 times more space-efficient compared to a typical car”

jtlu.org/index.php/jtlu/articl

I would also appreciate it if you don't use your American slang towards me.

VAF

@sully1503 @stux which would be much less dangerous and more ecological.

1 3₂+7

@sully1503 @stux
Jay-walking has a very interesting history, but basically:
When cars were getting introduced, people were getting (understandably) furious. People were getting hit by car drivers going crazy and noise polution suddenly sky rocketed from loud engines being everywhere (nowadays you have obnoxious motorcyclists putting speakers to make their engine sound louder) so they started to protest by (legally) blocking the roads and exercising their right to protest.

1 3₂+7

@sully1503 @stux The auto manufacturers got mad and made a law that means that people can no longer protest. This was "J-Walking". This law was not good grace but good riddance to pesky people exercising first amendment rights. Frick those pesky "trying to not die" people. Frick'em.

Go Up