3 ms·

It's not "weird" to not want gratuitous nuisance, health problems, or slaughtered children. Indeed, indifference to these seems extremely weird (sociopathic), a

It's not "weird" to not want gratuitous nuisance, health problems, or slaughtered children. Indeed, indifference to these seems extremely weird (sociopathic), and I would appreciate it if such people stay far from civilization out in the desert or whatever. (Though they should also be paying their fair share for the environmental costs of the CO2 emissions they pump out which are putting us on a path toward literal un-livability of the Earth, to which end gasoline should probably cost like $15/gallon.)

Alupis 2y ago
> It's not "weird" to not want gratuitous nuisance, health problems, or slaughtered children. Using outrageous hyperbole in this manner might be even more weird than your original baseless assumptions. > fair share... of the CO2 emissions they pump out which are putting us on a path toward literal un-livability of the Earth Your hyperbole is putting on a path toward literal un-livability of the Earth. It's making me nauseous because of how weird it is.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- faggotbreath 2y ago
  [dead]
- digital-cygnet 2y ago
  Can you explain why you'd characterize it as hyperbole? Larger vehicles are demonstrably more dangerous[1], especially to children, and do put out more CO2 emissions. In what other context is it socially acceptable for people to put externalities like those brought by SUVs onto those around them? The one I can mostly think of is secondhand smoke, which at least in my part of the world is pretty heavily looked down on. [1] > compact SUVs, full-size SUVs, and pickup trucks all result in a significantly higher probability of pedestrian death when compared to a similar collision involving a car. Compact SUVs increase the probability of death by 63%, pickups increase the probability by 68%, and full-size SUVs increase the probability by 99% https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212012224000017 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221201222...

Alupis 2y ago

> It's not "weird" to not want gratuitous nuisance, health problems, or slaughtered children. Using outrageous hyperbole in this manner might be even more weird than your original baseless assumptions. > fair share... of the CO2 emissions they pump out which are putting us on a path toward literal un-livability of the Earth Your hyperbole is putting on a path toward literal un-livability of the Earth. It's making me nauseous because of how weird it is.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
faggotbreath 2y ago
[dead]
digital-cygnet 2y ago
Can you explain why you'd characterize it as hyperbole? Larger vehicles are demonstrably more dangerous[1], especially to children, and do put out more CO2 emissions. In what other context is it socially acceptable for people to put externalities like those brought by SUVs onto those around them? The one I can mostly think of is secondhand smoke, which at least in my part of the world is pretty heavily looked down on. [1] > compact SUVs, full-size SUVs, and pickup trucks all result in a significantly higher probability of pedestrian death when compared to a similar collision involving a car. Compact SUVs increase the probability of death by 63%, pickups increase the probability by 68%, and full-size SUVs increase the probability by 99% https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212012224000017 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221201222...