3 ms·
Indeed, the speed limits are completely reasonable if you don't want to remove people from the streets - but your suggestion seemed to be that people were near-
by vertex-four 9y ago
Indeed, the speed limits are completely reasonable if you don't want to remove people from the streets - but your suggestion seemed to be that people were near-immediately removed from the streets instead of limiting what cars can do at first. There were 30 years when cars were lawfully limited to 4mph in rural areas, so your "even on empty roads" point is moot.
- Retric 9y agoThere where not exactly a lot of cars over most of that 30 years. However, my point was more cars had strong advocates pushing adoption where pedestrians where simply used to how things where and never really organized to protect how things where. Thus you get jaywalking as a crime, and justified many deaths as people breaking the law instead of the naritive that cars are insanely dangerous and should be banned. In theory cars could have been banned, but in practice their advocates had little trouble changing perceptions.
- vertex-four 9y agoNote that jaywalking is very much not a crime in the UK. Off of a motorway (which is a relatively recent invention), roads are still for people to some extent. Hopping off the pavement for a couple of seconds to bypass someone who's decided to stop right in front of you is semi-normal, much of rural UK doesn't even have pavements, and we get taught how to Stop, Look, Listen, Live in order to cross a road without a traffic light as kids. If a pedestrian starts to cross the road, they have right of way. I've been on roads in some city centres where vehicles have to be very, very careful as there's a road through a pedestrianised area and people are rather bold crossing the road. If the vehicle was to cause injury, the driver would likely be liable.