4 ms·

Not surprisingly, the socialism is blatantly obvious. The science as well, the dependency between impact veolocity and severity of injury and risk of survival

by stinos 3y ago

Not surprisingly, the socialism is blatantly obvious. The science as well, the dependency between impact veolocity and severity of injury and risk of survival of pedestrians and cyclists is fairly well studied and known. the image there sure does not look like a 30km/h street to me I've been there (or somewhere in Amsterdam where it looks exactly the same) and at peak hour 50km/h passing by a crowded bicycle path while at the same time there's a tram next to you surely does not feel appropriate. But yes, that could be cultural.

okokwhatever 3y ago
It´s like mixing pedestrians with heavy construction machines. Wouldn´t be better to separate both of them for the good of everyone? I mean, not everyone has the possibility of walking a couple of streets to buy a cappuccino and then take an elevator to the office. Try having kids in a city today and then let's talk.
- pjc50 3y ago
  In Amsterdam you just take the kids to school in the bakfiets.
  - okokwhatever 3y ago
    Again Amsterdam. Amsterdam is just an example for Amsterdam. Try this in Rome, Buenos Aires, Mexico DC and lets talk again mate. The problem, the real one, is we have cities not prepared for this generation
    - pjc50 3y ago
      I mean, the original article is talking about Amsterdam? Which has both natural advantages and a massive head start on bike culture. Need to get on the public transport building first.
- Muromec 3y ago
  The school is usually about 500 meters from the door too, so either you walk or kids cycle too (spoiled ones get hauled in a bakfiets of course).
- LeanderK 3y ago
  I don't get this comment? Separating what? Pedestrians and cars? Cars and bikes? Isn't this also mostly done? I mean that's the idea behind bike lanes for example. There are limits to the amount of separation possible though. > I mean, not everyone has the possibility of walking a couple of streets to buy a cappuccino and then take an elevator to the office. Try having kids in a city today and then let's talk. I don't get this comment. Is there no cafe near you? Also, you still shouldn't speed in residential or mixed neighbourhoods, regardless of where you live. Even if your office is further away. People live there. A highway and ring road usually takes you reasonable near you office, for most cities in europe and I bet every city in the US. > Try having kids in a city today What's the difference to having a kid in a city in the past? Cars certainly grew bigger and that's strictly worse for having a kid in the city. I get not wanting your kids to grow up in the city, but that's also your own decision. And if you end up with a long commute others shouldn't bear unreasonable consequences. Others might raise their kids in the city and the kid might want to cross the road (assuming it is old enough) without a fear of death from thousands of cars speeding by.

by stinos 3y ago

okokwhatever 3y ago

It´s like mixing pedestrians with heavy construction machines. Wouldn´t be better to separate both of them for the good of everyone? I mean, not everyone has the possibility of walking a couple of streets to buy a cappuccino and then take an elevator to the office. Try having kids in a city today and then let's talk.

pjc50 3y ago
In Amsterdam you just take the kids to school in the bakfiets.
- okokwhatever 3y ago
  Again Amsterdam. Amsterdam is just an example for Amsterdam. Try this in Rome, Buenos Aires, Mexico DC and lets talk again mate. The problem, the real one, is we have cities not prepared for this generation
  - pjc50 3y ago
    I mean, the original article is talking about Amsterdam? Which has both natural advantages and a massive head start on bike culture. Need to get on the public transport building first.
Muromec 3y ago
The school is usually about 500 meters from the door too, so either you walk or kids cycle too (spoiled ones get hauled in a bakfiets of course).
LeanderK 3y ago
I don't get this comment? Separating what? Pedestrians and cars? Cars and bikes? Isn't this also mostly done? I mean that's the idea behind bike lanes for example. There are limits to the amount of separation possible though. > I mean, not everyone has the possibility of walking a couple of streets to buy a cappuccino and then take an elevator to the office. Try having kids in a city today and then let's talk. I don't get this comment. Is there no cafe near you? Also, you still shouldn't speed in residential or mixed neighbourhoods, regardless of where you live. Even if your office is further away. People live there. A highway and ring road usually takes you reasonable near you office, for most cities in europe and I bet every city in the US. > Try having kids in a city today What's the difference to having a kid in a city in the past? Cars certainly grew bigger and that's strictly worse for having a kid in the city. I get not wanting your kids to grow up in the city, but that's also your own decision. And if you end up with a long commute others shouldn't bear unreasonable consequences. Others might raise their kids in the city and the kid might want to cross the road (assuming it is old enough) without a fear of death from thousands of cars speeding by.