15 ms·

The problem has already been solved a long time ago, but Americans just don't like the answer. Driving a car means driving a vehicle that can easily murder an

The problem has already been solved a long time ago, but Americans just don't like the answer. Driving a car means driving a vehicle that can easily murder an entire family in a split second. Drivers should have a greater amount of responsibility for traffic safety and that responsibility should be enshrined in the laws. It's so hypocritical that Americans do apply that logic to guns and use it to justify responsible gun ownership, but any 16 year old can wield a car like it's toy and get away with it. Amsterdam cyclist all act like anti-social a-holes, but over here that is not considered an excuse to just fucking run them over with your car. Period. It's a pointless argument. Unprotected cyclists and pedestrians should not be held to the same standards as drivers because the consequences are wildly different. It's like saying because people are hitting me with fluffy cotton balls it's okay for me to fire live rounds at them if nobody stops them. Insane.

VLM 12y ago
"Amsterdam cyclist all act like anti-social a-holes, but over here that is not considered an excuse to just fucking run them over with your car." Why? Anything other than "just because"? I'll give you a personal example where I was not directly involved but I was sort of present. So I'm at my place of employment, there's streetlights with a dangerous blind corner less than a block away from the front door, trucks parked on the street and stuff. Teen on his bike tries to run a red light at this blind corner, ends up dead underneath a bus in an instant. I ran the math based on some trig and the speeds involved and at this blind corner both the biker and bus driver thought the intersection was clear until, at most, the last 1/20th of a second of the kids life. The passenger side wheels went right over the kids head, likely he never knew what hit him. Wasn't much left of that kid. Most drivers I work with were infuriated because everyone's got experience with bikers not following the law and its bound to happen sooner or later. And frankly its going to happen again, and maybe I'll be the one hitting a red-light-running biker. And I don't really feel bad about it and I refuse to accept responsibility for the kids actions. There's nothing the bus driver could have done about it and nothing I can do about it in the inevitable situation I hit a biker. So there seems little point in not allowing it as an excuse. Note that I've got nothing against suicide prevention, I'd be the first guy to suggest maybe education, or rebuild that intersection, or ... something? But the kid willfully and intentionally played russian roulette and lost. I don't wanna have to wash his innards off my car, but I'm probably going to have to do something like this, sooner or later. Who pays for the damage to my car, thats whats important to me. The bikers might not care about their own lives so I feel no obligation to do the caring for them, but I do care about my car.
- kaonashi 12y ago
  > I don't wanna have to wash his innards off my car, but I'm probably going to have to do something like this, sooner or later Sounds like selection bias. The amount of bike fatalities is nowhere near large enough that you should be expecting to run someone over.
  - VLM 12y ago
    Then they should keep running red lights. What could possibly go wrong? Its also a strongly social discussion, not private. Someone I know or care about will run a red-light running biker over, although ahead of time there's no way to tell who.
    - kaonashi 12y ago
      > Someone I know or care about will run a red-light running biker over Also very doubtful. It's much more likely that your or someone you care about will run over a law-abiding cyclist.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]

VLM 12y ago

"Amsterdam cyclist all act like anti-social a-holes, but over here that is not considered an excuse to just fucking run them over with your car." Why? Anything other than "just because"? I'll give you a personal example where I was not directly involved but I was sort of present. So I'm at my place of employment, there's streetlights with a dangerous blind corner less than a block away from the front door, trucks parked on the street and stuff. Teen on his bike tries to run a red light at this blind corner, ends up dead underneath a bus in an instant. I ran the math based on some trig and the speeds involved and at this blind corner both the biker and bus driver thought the intersection was clear until, at most, the last 1/20th of a second of the kids life. The passenger side wheels went right over the kids head, likely he never knew what hit him. Wasn't much left of that kid. Most drivers I work with were infuriated because everyone's got experience with bikers not following the law and its bound to happen sooner or later. And frankly its going to happen again, and maybe I'll be the one hitting a red-light-running biker. And I don't really feel bad about it and I refuse to accept responsibility for the kids actions. There's nothing the bus driver could have done about it and nothing I can do about it in the inevitable situation I hit a biker. So there seems little point in not allowing it as an excuse. Note that I've got nothing against suicide prevention, I'd be the first guy to suggest maybe education, or rebuild that intersection, or ... something? But the kid willfully and intentionally played russian roulette and lost. I don't wanna have to wash his innards off my car, but I'm probably going to have to do something like this, sooner or later. Who pays for the damage to my car, thats whats important to me. The bikers might not care about their own lives so I feel no obligation to do the caring for them, but I do care about my car.

kaonashi 12y ago
> I don't wanna have to wash his innards off my car, but I'm probably going to have to do something like this, sooner or later Sounds like selection bias. The amount of bike fatalities is nowhere near large enough that you should be expecting to run someone over.
- VLM 12y ago
  Then they should keep running red lights. What could possibly go wrong? Its also a strongly social discussion, not private. Someone I know or care about will run a red-light running biker over, although ahead of time there's no way to tell who.
  - kaonashi 12y ago
    > Someone I know or care about will run a red-light running biker over Also very doubtful. It's much more likely that your or someone you care about will run over a law-abiding cyclist.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]