13 ms·

I have lived in nyc for a long time both in manhattan and Brooklyn. I have never understood how these cars and bikes are allowed to roam the streets like they d

• StanislavPetrov 4y ago
  What I also haven't seen mentioned is the ear-shattering beeping that is required from commercial vehicles as they back up. It is basically a non-stop cacophony of overlapping, deafening beeps as trucks, vans and buses jockey for position and parking spots.
• antihero 4y ago
  I’d prefer to put up with mild annoyances than seep ever more into authoritarianism. Yes the guy is a dick, but you’re blowing it way out of proportion. Honestly quite sick of the ever more sterile, dull, and gentrified cities we inhabit (I live in London).
  • gizmo 4y ago
    Pollution limits aren't authoritarianism. Toxic fumes and noise are both significant and harmful externalities, and the "free market" is really bad at curtailing externalities like these. This might be dull and boring to you, but that's probably because these externalities do not significantly affect you. If you want to seek (loud and dangerous) thrills you have almost unlimited opportunities today to pursue them.
    • wowokay 4y ago
      That’s true, but you also can’t discount the fact that people choose to live in expensive urban areas like New York, after only sure fire way to get away from the problem would be to move.
      • DangitBobby 4y ago
        Actually, those assholes are everywhere. I was raging to my brother about a modified bike that ripped a giant fart right next to a bunch of houses, and he was saying he gets those on his street all the time.
      • 5e92cb50239222b 4y ago
        Oh please. I'm living on the other side of the planet in a city that can't be any farther from New York in just about every way, and can relate to everything I'm reading here.
      • lolinder 4y ago
        I live in a suburb and still relate to the complaints 100%. The only way to get away from people riding loud, stinky motorcycles/sports cars/monster trucks seems to be to live on a ranch in the middle of nowhere.
    • kmlx 4y ago
      > Pollution limits aren't authoritarianism. of course they are, but we accept them because of the negative effects that you mention.
      • amanaplanacanal 4y ago
        > Authoritarianism is a form of government characterized by the rejection of political plurality, the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in the rule of law, separation of powers, and democratic voting. From Wikipedia. Not sure how limits on pollution are anything like that.
    • jtbayly 4y ago
      There are “significant and harmful externalities” to authoritarianism, too. Have you considered them?
    • tekknik 4y ago
      > Pollution limits aren't authoritarianism. Toxic fumes and noise are both significant and harmful externalities, and the "free market" is really bad at curtailing externalities like these. Woah now, why is there anymore “toxic fumes” than any typical exhaust? Are you confused and think the louder the exhaust the dirtier the exhaust? While this can certainly be true, the muffler has nothing to do with emissions. That’s the catalytic converter. A loud exhaust simply removes some sound baffles so the air moving has less restriction. It should not pollute more if they’ve not modified the catalytic converter.
  • alx__ 4y ago
    I find it amusing that people purposely move into dense urban cities, then complain about all the noise. Like what did you expect? It's endless random fragments of new sounds. People have different tolerances for what is "annoying". The most Onion bit of news I've seen is NIMBYs who buy condos next to a music venues. Then complain/litigate about noise till it gets shut down.
    • _dain_ 4y ago
      >I find it amusing that people purposely move into dense urban cities, then complain about all the noise. Like what did you expect? This is a defeatist attitude. You could have made the same comment a hundred years ago except replace "noise" with "smog", yet clean air regulations improved the lives of billions. Cities aren't necessarily loud; most of the noise comes from cars. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTV-wwszGw8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTV-wwszGw8
      • throwaway2037 4y ago
        Yes, I agree. Visit at any big German city on a Sunday. It is a semi-religious tradition to be quiet on Sundays (and national holidays). Even as a tourist, it was impressive! And, Germany also heavily regulates aftermarket parts for cars -- so there are almost no "rumblers" to be heard. Tokyo is also amazingly quiet for its size and density. Just one block away from any major thoroughfare will be pleasantly quiet, but can have a lively high street with shopping, restaurants, bars, and cafes (called "sho-ten-gai"). A long time ago, I read a study about noise from high speed roads (freeways, expressways, auto-bahn, etc.) and the effect on people who live near them. They have (statistically significant) higher levels of stress, and all of the negative mental and physical effects that come with it. This is one of the major benefits from using special low-noise cement or asphalt, or trees / shrubs / barriers to reduce noise effects on people who live very close. Finally, I'm excited for a future where more cars, trucks, and buses are electric. It will certainly make cities more quiet and livable.
        • tekknik 4y ago
          > Finally, I'm excited for a future where more cars, trucks, and buses are electric. It will certainly make cities more quiet and livable. What makes you think electric cars are not going to be modified? Have you ever unwound an electric motor to increase its performance and heard the noise it makes? It’s much louder. Have you heard the electric drag cars? They are also not very quiet.
• oefrha 4y ago
  I have no frigging clue why these biker jerks aren’t deafened by their own noise, when they manage to give me a start from a hundred yard away every single time.
  • MafellUser 4y ago
    They are young and only get a couple of hours of exposure per day so they can do that for a few years before they're completely deaf.
    • tekknik 4y ago
      The sound is being pushed out behind them, and in a car it’s further muffled by the interior of the car. Nothing to do with minimal exposure.
• walkhour 4y ago
  If you lived in Brooklyn, you'll know the main source of noise is not these cars, it's groups of people blasting music on the street and barbecuing. They last for hours. When July comes, the main source of noise is people having fun with firecrackers. They are fired throughout the night for weeks. So yeah, this is great, but the real noise sources are harder to address, because they involve approaching a whole group of people, not a lonely person in a car.
  • jijji 4y ago
    You're forgetting to mention the sound of the above-ground subway train that roars by all the second floor apartments every 15 minutes all day and night long, shaking the houses as it goes by. It's ironic they would make a law about noise when the loudest noises are coming from the trains, not the cars.
    • iflint 4y ago
      I used to live in a neighborhood of Queens next to an above ground line, and it is extremely loud. One thing I found interesting was that the support beams of the train were made of steel, however, down the street a little ways the support structure was built out of concrete. The concrete section was way quieter, despite looking nearly as old. Having an above ground train that isn't deafeningly loud is a huge improvement to the neighborhood, and I wonder why we don't think more about making new quiet above ground lines, instead of drilling +$2B per mile tunnels. I understand that people may find them to be an eyesore, but the noise is the top issue by far. With 100 years of new technology since the last ones were built, we should be able to make huge improvements in this area.
    • chrbr 4y ago
      I've lived in a dense urban environment before, and my personal experience is that I don't get pissed off about noises like trains or ambulances (both of which were a large percentage of the noise). There's just something about the raw audacity of someone _knowingly_ being an asshole by having very loud exhaust or music that gets under my skin. It just about drive me mad during the pandemic, where I felt I couldn't escape it - and ended up buying an in-town single-family house. My mental health immediately started to recover, and I truly believe it's because I'm now in a situation where my personal "noise space" isn't invaded as much by people who are _knowingly_ invading it.
• kmlx 4y ago
  > The city belongs to pedestrians, not some "tuff" redneck gang who think they can do whatever they want. the city, any city belongs to everyone, pedestrians, “redneck gang”, etc
  • tekknik 4y ago
    Where is this redneck gang coming from? Rednecks are typically southerners, and definitely don’t live in a city. I should know, 1/2 my family are rednecks.
    • superduperuser 4y ago
      Being that there are farmlands, trailers, "boonies", smallish towns all over the US, it would be safe to say that rednecks are an American phenomena rather than a southern one.
      • VWWHFSfQ 4y ago
        I've always thought it was strange how acceptable it is to refer to a certain class of people as "rednecks" but referring to the same class of people with a different skin color as "wetbacks" is a bigtime no-no.
        • earth_walker 4y ago
          Whether a word should or should not be used is complex, and usually a matter of context and fashion. As a society we do sometimes decide (try) to drop the regular use a word entirely due to the sheer weight of the history around its use - the argument being that it becomes impossible to remove the other connotations not matter the context. So why is one allowed when the other is not when they seem to arise from such similar contexts? First of all, while one might feel like its use is a 'bigtime no-no', the use of 'wetback' is still very popular in certain segments. So obviously it's only disallowed in certain contexts, e.g. around people who don't hold to that particular kind of racism, in public forums, in professional settings, etc. Among other words it's used every day as a rallying cry of the anti-migrant movement in North America, and as such has a lot of negative power. 'Redneck' on the other hand has been embraced by a 'grassroots' conservative backlash movement, which now has a certain amount of political power. So while originally it marginalized a class of people: the poor rural class that have less access to adequate education or health care, and show many of the same generational problems that visible minorities do; now the term also refers to a whole bunch of definitely not marginalized middle-class Americans. People whose grandparents would never have self-described as 'Redneck'. These new, political 'rednecks' backlash against anything they consider liberal, including efforts to help or defend the marginalized they purport to represent. So now in some contexts the use of the term is not only allowed, but encouraged. But where is that liberal society that's supposed to be defending the marginalized against bad words? Well, the liberals are hypocrites, just like most everyone else in this world. They'll jump on any chance to derogate 'the other' as long as it's fashionable to do so. They certainly won't come to the defense of the 'rednecks' while it's such a convenient rally cry against Trump voters. So it's us-versus-them politics at play here, and as in any political game the marginalized get trod on by both sides.
• _dain_ 4y ago
  Uh huh, yeah, it's the "rednecks" who are jumping turnstiles and smoking weed and blaring loud music. Sure.
• lr4444lr 4y ago
  I have never understood how these cars and bikes are allowed to roam the streets like they do openly all day and all night while police used to be so quick to arrest youngsters who jumped turnstiles or smoked weed Because giving chase to vehicles presents a huge public safety danger on city streets. Unless you're talking about a suspect of a major violent crime, especially when the infraction suggests drag racing tendencies, the police in many jurisdictions are very limited from pursuit.
  • namlem 4y ago
    You don't need to give chase, just note the license plate and look up the owner it's registered to.
    • octoberfranklin 4y ago
      This line of reasoning is why cars get stolen.
• tekknik 4y ago
  > I have never understood how these cars and bikes are allowed to roam the streets like they do openly all day and all night while police used to be so quick to arrest youngsters who jumped turnstiles or smoked weed. With the crime wave NYC is experiencing, is there not more important crimes to focus on?
• banannaise 4y ago
  The crime that gets prioritized is the crime that's easy for police. Turnstile jumping? Weed? Basically harmless, but really easy for a cop to ring up some numbers and say he's keeping the city safe.
  • bobbylarrybobby 4y ago
    What makes these crimes easier? A traffic violation only requires the license plate?
    • banannaise 4y ago
      That's paperwork, rather than slamming a kid's head into the floor. Paperwork isn't fun.