3 ms·

Imagine you are a family with young children. You might live in a city right now - I live near Minneapolis where they've got a brand-new (like, less than 5 year

Imagine you are a family with young children. You might live in a city right now - I live near Minneapolis where they've got a brand-new (like, less than 5 years old for most of it) lightrail system. It's shiny, it's fast, it's efficient, what's not to love? Assaults. A 15-year-old girl was sexually assaulted 4 months ago. Less than a month ago someone got attacked with a knife. Less than a year ago, three teens were arrested for repeated racially-based attacks. In 2020 (because we don't have numbers for 2021 yet), there were 51 aggravated assaults and 239 "other assaults" despite 59% lower ridership from COVID. And it's not just assaults - drug use around (or sometimes even on) the lightrail is a significant problem (276 reported offenses 2020). Theft is yet another problem. I'm not bringing my family (or even myself) anywhere near the lightrail. I'd prefer to drive just for their safety and mine. I know it's worse for the environment but their safety is my first concern. And such is the problem with public transit. It's easy to think of it as reducing load on the environment while forgetting that lax law enforcement turns it into a somewhat scary place to be with family members.

Steltek 5y ago
These are significant and general problems with society right now but perhaps orthogonal to transportation. Being able to drive past the homeless encampment might be convenient(?) right now but we've graduated from ignoring our crumbling, unaffordable car infrastructure to ignoring the crumbling, unaffordable healthcare and housing.
- gjsman-1000 5y ago
  I don't understand how that is related to my argument at all. I'm saying that the lightrail is objectively not as safe or predictable as driving with my family, and for that reason, the reason to use the lightrail because it's better for the environment is of less importance to me.
  - staticman2 5y ago
    Some suburban people in wealthy neighborhoods would say it's too dangerous to ever visit a city. It's unpredictable due to crime. You've drawn the line at visiting the city but using a car, and maybe you are right, but I don't think listing incidents without context really makes your case.
nradov 5y ago
The local authorities in California keep telling people to drive less and bike more, but then they allowed the bike trails to be turned into homeless camps. I know several people who were harassed or assaulted while cycling through those areas, so now they've gone back to driving for safety.
- landemva 5y ago
  Clear example of public property and tragedy of the commons.
mempko 5y ago
Ok, but what about car jacking? Have you done the statistics to figure out which is safer? Also what about risk of health via car crash? https://www.startribune.com/a-breakdown-of-2021-carjackings-in-minneapolis-by-neighborhood-map/600134704/ https://www.startribune.com/a-breakdown-of-2021-carjackings-...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- gjsman-1000 5y ago
  Carjacking around here tends to take the fake-accident tactic. This is where the criminal bumps you enough to think an accident occurred, you pull over to exchange information for insurance, and then the criminal pulls out a gun. I have a few notes. 1. Even though this is incredibly scary and stressful, the percentage of people actually shot in carjackings is almost unheard of. If I had a family, it would be a better trade to lose my car than to have one of them sexually assaulted on a lightrail, or have myself get a knife somewhere (both of which have happened within the past few months). 2. Carjackings can be (partially) avoided. The police have sent out warnings in the city that if someone bumps you and you suspect a carjacking, go to the nearest police station or at least drive to somewhere with a lot of cameras up close and witnesses (gas station?) before exchanging information. This means that carjacking still has some preemptive measures I personally can take, whereas riding the lightrail, stuff just mostly happens. 3. The map of carjackings in Minneapolis has far more people living in that area than people riding the lightrail. The lightrail, by number of people traveling on it and by size / concentration of people within a given area, is much more dangerous.
ericmay 5y ago
> I'm not bringing my family (or even myself) anywhere near the lightrail. I'd prefer to drive just for their safety and mine. I know it's worse for the environment but their safety is my first concern. It's not just worse for the environment but also much more dangerous to drive a car compared to the incidents you cited. You think you are in control because you're behind the wheel, but you're not. You have no more control over other drivers than you do someone attacking someone on this light rail. It's like if you ask someone today (2019) if America is more dangerous than before they'd say yes because that's what they hear on the news, but the statistics show otherwise. Similarly here but with car crashes actually causing quite a lot of death and destruction. > I'm not bringing my family (or even myself) anywhere near the lightrail. I'd prefer to drive just for their safety and mine. I know it's worse for the environment but their safety is my first concern. > And such is the problem with public transit. It's easy to think of it as reducing load on the environment while forgetting that lax law enforcement turns it into a somewhat scary place to be with family members. It's mind-boggling how so many countries can do it but we can't in the US. How is it that China, Japan, Korea, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom can do this but we can't? Are Americans objectively worse people?
- bradlys 5y ago
  > Are Americans objectively worse people? In some particular ways - yes. We also just don’t have all the support networks that those other countries have. I mean - we still don’t even offer universal healthcare and it looks like we won’t for at least another 10+ years. We don’t care for the common person at all. We cater to the rich.
- swordsmith 5y ago
  These other countries don't have calls to defund the police for one
landemva 5y ago
'I know it's worse for the environment ...' Considering all-in light rail costs per passenger, your assumption may not be correct.
smileysteve 5y ago
Now do hit and runs, drunk driving, and road rage shootings, and ask if you should take your family near a car. (That's too ignore that accidents also happen more often than cars) You reference an incident 4 months ago; but in 4 months, likely 300 people have died in auto incidents in the state.

Steltek 5y ago

These are significant and general problems with society right now but perhaps orthogonal to transportation. Being able to drive past the homeless encampment might be convenient(?) right now but we've graduated from ignoring our crumbling, unaffordable car infrastructure to ignoring the crumbling, unaffordable healthcare and housing.

gjsman-1000 5y ago
I don't understand how that is related to my argument at all. I'm saying that the lightrail is objectively not as safe or predictable as driving with my family, and for that reason, the reason to use the lightrail because it's better for the environment is of less importance to me.
- staticman2 5y ago
  Some suburban people in wealthy neighborhoods would say it's too dangerous to ever visit a city. It's unpredictable due to crime. You've drawn the line at visiting the city but using a car, and maybe you are right, but I don't think listing incidents without context really makes your case.

nradov 5y ago

The local authorities in California keep telling people to drive less and bike more, but then they allowed the bike trails to be turned into homeless camps. I know several people who were harassed or assaulted while cycling through those areas, so now they've gone back to driving for safety.

landemva 5y ago
Clear example of public property and tragedy of the commons.

mempko 5y ago

Ok, but what about car jacking? Have you done the statistics to figure out which is safer? Also what about risk of health via car crash? https://www.startribune.com/a-breakdown-of-2021-carjackings-in-minneapolis-by-neighborhood-map/600134704/ https://www.startribune.com/a-breakdown-of-2021-carjackings-...

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
gjsman-1000 5y ago
Carjacking around here tends to take the fake-accident tactic. This is where the criminal bumps you enough to think an accident occurred, you pull over to exchange information for insurance, and then the criminal pulls out a gun. I have a few notes. 1. Even though this is incredibly scary and stressful, the percentage of people actually shot in carjackings is almost unheard of. If I had a family, it would be a better trade to lose my car than to have one of them sexually assaulted on a lightrail, or have myself get a knife somewhere (both of which have happened within the past few months). 2. Carjackings can be (partially) avoided. The police have sent out warnings in the city that if someone bumps you and you suspect a carjacking, go to the nearest police station or at least drive to somewhere with a lot of cameras up close and witnesses (gas station?) before exchanging information. This means that carjacking still has some preemptive measures I personally can take, whereas riding the lightrail, stuff just mostly happens. 3. The map of carjackings in Minneapolis has far more people living in that area than people riding the lightrail. The lightrail, by number of people traveling on it and by size / concentration of people within a given area, is much more dangerous.

ericmay 5y ago

> I'm not bringing my family (or even myself) anywhere near the lightrail. I'd prefer to drive just for their safety and mine. I know it's worse for the environment but their safety is my first concern. It's not just worse for the environment but also much more dangerous to drive a car compared to the incidents you cited. You think you are in control because you're behind the wheel, but you're not. You have no more control over other drivers than you do someone attacking someone on this light rail. It's like if you ask someone today (2019) if America is more dangerous than before they'd say yes because that's what they hear on the news, but the statistics show otherwise. Similarly here but with car crashes actually causing quite a lot of death and destruction. > I'm not bringing my family (or even myself) anywhere near the lightrail. I'd prefer to drive just for their safety and mine. I know it's worse for the environment but their safety is my first concern. > And such is the problem with public transit. It's easy to think of it as reducing load on the environment while forgetting that lax law enforcement turns it into a somewhat scary place to be with family members. It's mind-boggling how so many countries can do it but we can't in the US. How is it that China, Japan, Korea, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom can do this but we can't? Are Americans objectively worse people?

bradlys 5y ago
> Are Americans objectively worse people? In some particular ways - yes. We also just don’t have all the support networks that those other countries have. I mean - we still don’t even offer universal healthcare and it looks like we won’t for at least another 10+ years. We don’t care for the common person at all. We cater to the rich.
swordsmith 5y ago
These other countries don't have calls to defund the police for one

landemva 5y ago

'I know it's worse for the environment ...' Considering all-in light rail costs per passenger, your assumption may not be correct.

smileysteve 5y ago

Now do hit and runs, drunk driving, and road rage shootings, and ask if you should take your family near a car. (That's too ignore that accidents also happen more often than cars) You reference an incident 4 months ago; but in 4 months, likely 300 people have died in auto incidents in the state.