4 ms·

So this entire thing is confusing to me. It's a label that's a crosswalk but it's also apparently labeled as something you're not allowed to go across according

So this entire thing is confusing to me. It's a label that's a crosswalk but it's also apparently labeled as something you're not allowed to go across according to the article. "The area is clearly marked to keep traffic away as it was just re-painted to repair previous damage." So which is it are we allowed to transit across it or not? Do the police regularly arrest anyone on a scooter that's in a sidewalk or a crosswalk that is not this one? Scooters typically aren't considered motor vehicles worthy of a road use but I don't know the specific laws. I'm doing burnouts and intentionally leaving rubber marks on the roadway or other traffic ways is a crime in most places. Either a form of vandalism or mischief. I do wonder about the selective enforcement here but and nonetheless if they're doing it intentionally they should be cited. The last thing that bothers me about this article is it appears that this is a group of kids young adults doing this. They are attributing their motivations to some sort of homophobia but I'm not sure where they have any evidence of that. When I read this I would attribute it to the most simple explanation which is kids being edgy and shitting on something other people like. You don't need homophobia to explain kids being kids.

_flux 2y ago
There were already areas that are out-of-limits for the scooters-by-hour, so I presume it uses a similar mechanism. I'm guessing it would be similar to the letting go of the accelerator, so relatively smooth way to stop it. I agree that you don't need homophobia to explain this—it could be just any kind of new painting in the area to be an invitation for some people to mess up with it. Lime probably feels that they don't want their vehicles to attract this kind of publicity. The article claims the new paintings were clearly marked, though the pictures don't seem to show it. Nevertheless, I imagine it is a valid concern for any kind of new road painting that people will mess with it before it's dry (usually accidentally), so they are somehow marked that way to limit traffic. Maybe it was the case here as well, but some people chose to do it regardless.
- hndamien 2y ago
  Even if it was specifically targeted it could still be pro-gay and anti-trans. So they are drawing a long bow to say it is homophobia.
  - folayi 2y ago
    Agreed, it's not unlikely. The ideology of the latter typically does not recognise exclusively same-sex attraction. I know many old school gay men and lesbian women who are against it on that basis.
complaintdept 2y ago
For cyclists in my area you aren't considered a pedestrian if you're riding a bike, and they have tons of signs telling you to walk it across the crosswalk. Presumably it's because bikes can move a lot faster than someone on foot and a motorist may not have time to brake if the cyclist darts into the crosswalk. > They are attributing their motivations to some sort of homophobia This could potentially be used to upgrade a petty crime to a hate crime, if prosecutors could convince jurors they were homophobes.
ruszki 2y ago
[flagged]

_flux 2y ago

There were already areas that are out-of-limits for the scooters-by-hour, so I presume it uses a similar mechanism. I'm guessing it would be similar to the letting go of the accelerator, so relatively smooth way to stop it. I agree that you don't need homophobia to explain this—it could be just any kind of new painting in the area to be an invitation for some people to mess up with it. Lime probably feels that they don't want their vehicles to attract this kind of publicity. The article claims the new paintings were clearly marked, though the pictures don't seem to show it. Nevertheless, I imagine it is a valid concern for any kind of new road painting that people will mess with it before it's dry (usually accidentally), so they are somehow marked that way to limit traffic. Maybe it was the case here as well, but some people chose to do it regardless.

hndamien 2y ago
Even if it was specifically targeted it could still be pro-gay and anti-trans. So they are drawing a long bow to say it is homophobia.
- folayi 2y ago
  Agreed, it's not unlikely. The ideology of the latter typically does not recognise exclusively same-sex attraction. I know many old school gay men and lesbian women who are against it on that basis.

complaintdept 2y ago

For cyclists in my area you aren't considered a pedestrian if you're riding a bike, and they have tons of signs telling you to walk it across the crosswalk. Presumably it's because bikes can move a lot faster than someone on foot and a motorist may not have time to brake if the cyclist darts into the crosswalk. > They are attributing their motivations to some sort of homophobia This could potentially be used to upgrade a petty crime to a hate crime, if prosecutors could convince jurors they were homophobes.

ruszki 2y ago

[flagged]