8 ms·

+1. And don't use the car to deliver your kids. Use the bike. It is possible: There are children seats and trailers. And there are ebikes. There is little excus

by ktpsns 7y ago

+1. And don't use the car to deliver your kids. Use the bike. It is possible: There are children seats and trailers. And there are ebikes. There is little excuse for driving cars. Despite you live in countryside US, where you apparently need a truck to get anywhere.

mayank 7y ago
> There is little excuse for driving cars. In the case you mention, airbags are a pretty good reason. Also distance. And disabilities.
- the_gastropod 7y ago
  Airbags are good as... protection from other cars, or from driving your own car too fast, and hitting a large object. You shouldn't live a great distance from places you frequent. And there's no reason a disabled individual requires a multi-ton machine capable of going 100+mph to get around.
- abtinf 7y ago
  And convenience. And warmth. And AC. And comfort. Unless your goal is to exercise, a car is almost always better in every dimension.
  - okmokmz 7y ago
    For your own comfort and convenience perhaps. For the environment and your health a car is almost always worse in every dimension
    - abtinf 7y ago
      If your goal is to maximize the well being of some arbitrary “environment”, suicide is the only rational and moral coarse of action. Since you are on this forum, not only have you not done that and, by your own standards, you’ve made the environment worse by using energy and technology made from toxic chemicals. You don’t take your own ideas seriously and are a hypocrite. I adhere a philosophy that holds human flourishing as the standard for all things. Driving a car radically improves the human environment compared to all alternatives, including walking.
      - okmokmz 7y ago
        >I adhere a philosophy that holds human flourishing as the standard for all things Says the guy saying I should kill myself if I really care about the environment... the irony
        jessaustin 7y ago
        One speculates that suggestion wasn't made in good faith.
        abtinf 7y ago
        You are attempting a transparent deception. It is your moral standard that demands suicide, not mine.
        kelnos 7y ago
        Now you're just arguing in bad faith and putting words in people's mouths. Please don't do that here.
      - TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
        > suicide is the only rational and moral coarse of action By that logic the best thing for Gandhi to have done to reduce the influence of British colonialism was to have killed himself. Rosa Parka could have made more seats available by offing herself.
tapland 7y ago
The US is absolutely screwed and biking these would scare the hell out of me. I would not want to go with a kid on or behind the bike. It's insane how little bikes (or pedestrians) are considered compared to here in Sweden.
cj 7y ago
> There is little excuse for driving cars. Despite you live in countryside US, where you apparently need a truck to get anywhere. You don't need a truck, but you definitely need a car (with four wheel drive in many parts). There are millions of people who live in places that require traveling on high-traffic busy roads to get from point A to B. These roads almost never have a bike lane (bike lanes do not exist outside of large cities). On many roads I drive on (speed limit 55 mph) there is no shoulder. Combine that with roads that have sharp curves that prevent drivers from seeing more than 25 meters ahead... yea, I would not bike with a kid with me.
- kelnos 7y ago
  Hell, I wouldn't bike, period, on those kinds of roads, kid or not.
ARandomerDude 7y ago
People with more than 2 kids should...?
war1025 7y ago
People in urban centers, I think, don't realize how spread out much of the US is. Yes, riding your bike in an urban area is often more or less as fast / convenient as driving. However, driving at 70mph vs biking at say 15mph, the time difference adds up very quickly once you are out in open country. Not to mention that there is very well built infrastructure for driving, while biking often means going on that same infrastructure with a 50mph difference between you and the rest of the traffic. Basically if you are riding on a bike on a highway, you need to act as if you were invisible and expect that cars may actively try to kill you.
- mehhh 7y ago
  Quite the suburban hellscape, eh? Many of these 50+ mph stroads forgo sidewalks and attempt to ban pedestrians (or even bikers sometimes).
  - war1025 7y ago
    Wouldn't really call it a suburban hellscape. Seems quite nice all in all. [1] [1] https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Nevada,+Iowa+50201/Ames,+Iowa/@42.0174038,-93.6858818,11 https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Nevada,+Iowa+50201/Ames,+Iow...
    - npmaile 7y ago
      Hey, I'm from near there! Go Cyclones! also my two cents: it's dangerous as all heck doing anything but driving on those roads. I almost got hit by a friend of mine who was texting and driving while I was running about 30 miles from there out in the country.
      - war1025 7y ago
        A high school friend's sister killed one of my cousin's friends who was out biking in a similar situation. Cars + people don't mix on highways.
ryandrake 7y ago
This “I don’t need a car to commute from SF to SF therefore nobody anywhere needs a car for any reason” attitude pops up at least twice a week here and is so tiring. I challenge you to do my 2 hour (each way) commute on a bike for more than a week. Happy to give you the route if you want to try it! And if you want me to just live closer to work, that’s fine too: please double my salary to enable that and I’ll get rid of my car.
- kelnos 7y ago
  Be careful, the standard response to that is "you should drastically change your lifestyle, uproot your family, and do financially irresponsible things in order to move closer to work so you can bike there". Also so, so tiring.
noxToken 7y ago
I once mapped my commute to work using multiple applications. 11 minutes via car, and 14 minutes via bike. However, there was no way to safely get from my house to my office. Even if I bit the bullet and spent 26 minutes on back roads, there were still major junctions that absolutely were not safe for bike traffic.

by ktpsns 7y ago

mayank 7y ago

> There is little excuse for driving cars. In the case you mention, airbags are a pretty good reason. Also distance. And disabilities.

the_gastropod 7y ago
Airbags are good as... protection from other cars, or from driving your own car too fast, and hitting a large object. You shouldn't live a great distance from places you frequent. And there's no reason a disabled individual requires a multi-ton machine capable of going 100+mph to get around.
abtinf 7y ago
And convenience. And warmth. And AC. And comfort. Unless your goal is to exercise, a car is almost always better in every dimension.
- okmokmz 7y ago
  For your own comfort and convenience perhaps. For the environment and your health a car is almost always worse in every dimension
  - abtinf 7y ago
    If your goal is to maximize the well being of some arbitrary “environment”, suicide is the only rational and moral coarse of action. Since you are on this forum, not only have you not done that and, by your own standards, you’ve made the environment worse by using energy and technology made from toxic chemicals. You don’t take your own ideas seriously and are a hypocrite. I adhere a philosophy that holds human flourishing as the standard for all things. Driving a car radically improves the human environment compared to all alternatives, including walking.
    - okmokmz 7y ago
      >I adhere a philosophy that holds human flourishing as the standard for all things Says the guy saying I should kill myself if I really care about the environment... the irony
      - jessaustin 7y ago
        One speculates that suggestion wasn't made in good faith.
      - abtinf 7y ago
        You are attempting a transparent deception. It is your moral standard that demands suicide, not mine.
        kelnos 7y ago
        Now you're just arguing in bad faith and putting words in people's mouths. Please don't do that here.
    - TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
      > suicide is the only rational and moral coarse of action By that logic the best thing for Gandhi to have done to reduce the influence of British colonialism was to have killed himself. Rosa Parka could have made more seats available by offing herself.

tapland 7y ago

The US is absolutely screwed and biking these would scare the hell out of me. I would not want to go with a kid on or behind the bike. It's insane how little bikes (or pedestrians) are considered compared to here in Sweden.

cj 7y ago

> There is little excuse for driving cars. Despite you live in countryside US, where you apparently need a truck to get anywhere. You don't need a truck, but you definitely need a car (with four wheel drive in many parts). There are millions of people who live in places that require traveling on high-traffic busy roads to get from point A to B. These roads almost never have a bike lane (bike lanes do not exist outside of large cities). On many roads I drive on (speed limit 55 mph) there is no shoulder. Combine that with roads that have sharp curves that prevent drivers from seeing more than 25 meters ahead... yea, I would not bike with a kid with me.

kelnos 7y ago
Hell, I wouldn't bike, period, on those kinds of roads, kid or not.

ARandomerDude 7y ago

People with more than 2 kids should...?

war1025 7y ago

People in urban centers, I think, don't realize how spread out much of the US is. Yes, riding your bike in an urban area is often more or less as fast / convenient as driving. However, driving at 70mph vs biking at say 15mph, the time difference adds up very quickly once you are out in open country. Not to mention that there is very well built infrastructure for driving, while biking often means going on that same infrastructure with a 50mph difference between you and the rest of the traffic. Basically if you are riding on a bike on a highway, you need to act as if you were invisible and expect that cars may actively try to kill you.

mehhh 7y ago
Quite the suburban hellscape, eh? Many of these 50+ mph stroads forgo sidewalks and attempt to ban pedestrians (or even bikers sometimes).
- war1025 7y ago
  Wouldn't really call it a suburban hellscape. Seems quite nice all in all. [1] [1] https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Nevada,+Iowa+50201/Ames,+Iowa/@42.0174038,-93.6858818,11 https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Nevada,+Iowa+50201/Ames,+Iow...
  - npmaile 7y ago
    Hey, I'm from near there! Go Cyclones! also my two cents: it's dangerous as all heck doing anything but driving on those roads. I almost got hit by a friend of mine who was texting and driving while I was running about 30 miles from there out in the country.
    - war1025 7y ago
      A high school friend's sister killed one of my cousin's friends who was out biking in a similar situation. Cars + people don't mix on highways.

ryandrake 7y ago

This “I don’t need a car to commute from SF to SF therefore nobody anywhere needs a car for any reason” attitude pops up at least twice a week here and is so tiring. I challenge you to do my 2 hour (each way) commute on a bike for more than a week. Happy to give you the route if you want to try it! And if you want me to just live closer to work, that’s fine too: please double my salary to enable that and I’ll get rid of my car.

kelnos 7y ago
Be careful, the standard response to that is "you should drastically change your lifestyle, uproot your family, and do financially irresponsible things in order to move closer to work so you can bike there". Also so, so tiring.

noxToken 7y ago

I once mapped my commute to work using multiple applications. 11 minutes via car, and 14 minutes via bike. However, there was no way to safely get from my house to my office. Even if I bit the bullet and spent 26 minutes on back roads, there were still major junctions that absolutely were not safe for bike traffic.