- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Edit: to clarify: the message in the ad is actually ironic/satirical, mocking the advice for cyclists to wear high-viz at night.
It uses the same logic but inverts the parts and responsabilities, by suggesting to motorists (not cyclists) to apply bright paint on their cars.
So this ad is not pro or against high-viz, it’s against victim blaming
Cross-posted from: https://mastodon.uno/users/rivoluzioneurbanamobilita/statuses/113544508246569296
You’re missing the point.
Its saying not killing cyclists is the job of the people who would be killing cyclists. Its saying operating dangerous heavy machinery is a privilege and it comes with responsibilities. A cyclist us never to blame for a car hitting a cyclist. It is always always always the drivers fault, because they chose to drive a car.
In my opinion a much too common privilege with responsibilities we dont take near seriously enough.
No, that’s a dumb take in all of the ways.
Sorry, when I wrote it I thought this was /fuckcars like ‘fuck you’ and not fuck cars like ‘fuck me now, I don’t even care who’s watching’. My mistake, and I now realize this was not the correct place to post this take, whether I believe in it or not.
I’m sorry, I thought this was satire not erotica. I’m not here to cockblock anyone.
That’s an insane take, right? If I as a cyclist blindly ride across a road directly in front of a heavy vehicle, surely it’s on me. In what way would that be the heavy vehicle drivers fault?
This ‘take’ is close to the law in NL. The shift in responsibility is there to even out the differences in safety mechanisms. The law acknowledges this disparity and seeks to provide additional protection to vulnerable road users. This rule encourages car drivers to exercise extra caution, knowing that they will likely bear legal responsibility in the event of an accident.
It’s important to note that the rule imposes strict liability, which means that the motorist is presumed responsible for damages unless evidence strongly indicates otherwise. If the cyclist is partially at fault (e.g., running a red light), liability might be shared, but the motorist is rarely absolved entirely.
I actually saw someone do this on El Camino Real in rush hour traffic. Probably the only reason they didn’t die is cars were going 20.
If my lover breaks my jaw in anger, thats not my fault.
Under no conditions is that my fault, and youre a terrible person if you say it is.
If an adult beats the shit out of a young child, that is, in no circumstance, the child’s fault. Youre a terrible fucking person if you say it is.
You can say its not the abusive parent’s fault and blame structural issues or whatever, and maybe thats fair sometimes, but still pretty suspicious.
This is like that. Cars are violent, they are inefficient, and they are a choice. You choose to (statistically) sacrifice innocents every time you get behind the wheel. Everything you do while driving is on you. Or possibly the civil engineers and lawmakers who created the situation. Do not blame the victim. The victim is not at fault for having been hurt, for cracking your windshield and stealing bits of safety glass with their face. Under no conditions is a victim at fault. You are at fault for hurting them.
Unless they hacked your car and remotely piloted it to kill them in some sort of elaborate suicide/frame-up, and you literally did not have control of the vehicle. In which case I’d still put some of the responsibility on you, because you put the weapon where they could get it, loaded it, and got in.
Edit: the California DMV and basic drivers ed class from high school at least partially agree with me. If you don’t, you’ve already failed one of the questions on the drivers test.
Again, insane comparisons, driving a heavy vehicle is in no way similar to intentionally assaulting someone. A more appropriate comparison might be if your lover was punching a punching bag and you dove in front of it mid hard swing, and they had no time to avoid hitting you. Is that your fault or theirs?
If a cyclist runs over a child, who was not visible at all until they ran into their path with no time to stop, on a path designated for bicycles where a pedestrian has no right to be, is the cyclist at fault?
Anyway I think I might be responding to a crazy person, so I’m probably wasting my time, but I’m interested in how deep it goes.
It’s not insane, even if it’s an unfamiliar concept. @[email protected] is advocating for what is basically the legal concept known as strict liability. It means that a person is held liable for the consequences of an action, even in the absence of negligence or intent. American courts have applied it to things like crop dusting, or use of explosives, but this exact scenario is the law in the Netherlands. A driver hitting a bicyclist there is strictly liable for at least half of the damages in all unintentional crashes. (That is, when the driver can’t prove that bicyclist was trying to get hit.)
I’m not against the law you mentioned, in my opinion everyone should be driving/riding defensively and crashes are often a failure of both parties to some extent. Even if you’re technically at fault often the other party could have done something to avoid or minimise the accident.
The insane part was the comparison to scenarios where a party is clearly at fault. How is beating the shit out of a child anywhere near equivalent to hitting a cyclist that has blindly ridden in front of your car with no chance to have predicted it?
Wow, you don’t sound very horny for cars. Maybe you dont belong here?
Oy, here I thought that a “fuck car” was the motor vehicle analogue of a fuck boy.
No, sorry, I realized at some point after my first reply here that this is an erotica subreddit. I made the exact same mistake. We were the assholes here, yucking these fine people’s exotic yum. I think I just assumed because it was on Lemmy.world and moy Lemmy.nsfw that it was like the Lemmy version of r/fuck cars. Same for you, right?
For the record; I absolutely hate cars, but i think sex is the best and most ethical use for them by far. If we must continue to have cars, I support a dick in every seat and a fleshy covering for every stick shift!
You’re a bit of a nutter, but that’s okay. I only say that because of the fetish analogy.
This is an anti-car community, but when blatantly ridiculous posts (like this one) get popular you get an effect similar to the reddit /all effect. Niche communities get swamped with normies and overrun pretty easily.
More like shooting a gun into a dark room. Maybe it’s empty. Maybe you’re a murderer.
Can’t see, dont drive.
More like shooting a gun at a shooting range, where you have a space you’re supposed to shoot, and someone is running across that range and gets hit. Are you a murderer then?
I get the “fuck cars” mentality, I’m with you, but making bad arguments doesn’t help our cause.
No. There is nowhere I, as a pedestrian, can go that is not downrange. I’m in one of the more walkable areas of my city, and I think fully half the square footage, between roads and parking is devoted to cars. No way for me to reach a grocery store restaurant or even bus stop without being downrange.
You’ve built your life around spraying automatic weapons fire into every room you walk into before you even look, so admitting that this is wrong is essentially admitting that your way of life is monstrous and your regard for humanity is at best disdainful in the shadow of your precious ford F1488 with spiked reaping grill.
You must live a really really weird life. I dunno if it’s ultra sad or not, but it’s definitely a bizarre worldview to wake up and think “everyone chosing to go to work in the only way available to them for most of the country is basically spraying an ak-47 everywhere they go” You can work to change that – great, all for it. But presuming the world where you’ve already won is absolutely bonkers.
Thats the amount t of danger youre adding to the world. Its just a fact. You finding it necessary for your lifestyle does not make it safe or ethical any more than needing it for eternal youth makes bathing in the blood of virgins ethical for me.
Should I just die? No? Then I gotta serial murder a bunch teenagers and republicans and drain their blood.
And lemme tell ya; with the rates of childhood sexual assault we have in this country, these are not small numbers! Honestly its a lot of work. You should give murdering children and bathing in their blood to achieve immortality a little more respect.
Again, I’m with the “fuck cars” ideology. I am not against you. But this is a dumb take.
Should there be shooting ranges everywhere? No. Is the fault of people using shooting ranges that you ran out into one and got shot because you don’t feel it should be there? No.
Maybe it shouldn’t. That’s a fair argument. But you saying that a guy is a murderer when he shot someone when they ran in front of him at a shooting range is not an argument that is going to gain any favor with anyone who isn’t already firmly in your camp, which means that argument is pointless.
I’m not saying don’t advocate for more walkability, but that doesn’t mean walking out into traffic in your neighborhood and getting hit is doing anyone any good. You get hit, drivers think you’re dumb, it was ultimately your fault, the movement for more walkability in urban areas gets set back because some dummy walked into traffic and resulted in a loss of respect from the public about the ideology. Don’t be a detriment to progress out of your own stubbornness of naivety about how progress actually works.
There is no way for me to get literally anywhere without being downrange. Not in any city in the united states.
You have defined the world as a shooting range, and told me its my fault for being downrange.
I can’t feel one of my legs because of you ‘people’. My back always hurts now. Doctors say it won’t get better. I was on the other side of a ditch, walking on loose dirt and roots when I was hit, because there was a break in the sidewalk. I was wearing bright red. I realky liked that dress, a gift from my first love, and they had to cut it off me-not to mention all the blood. I’m missing teeth. Im never not in pain now. I can’t stand still, there’s no way I can sit comfortably for more than about 90 seconds, sex is a whole fucking production, and It takes about a half hour pillow arranging ritual for me to lay down in a way that won’t make the pain worse tomorrow.
What could I have done better for this not to have been my fault? Believe me, I’ve gone over it in my head. I don’t know why why I did this to myself. I froze for a split second when I realized they weren’t going to stop. They had those really bright lights and I couldn’t see if it was a sedan or a big fuck-off truck. If it was a sedan and I tried to go flat I’d be torn to pieces even if I was fast enough, if it was a killdozer and I tried to roll over it I’d just be crushed like a fly and I would be very lucky if my mangled body didn’t stick in the grille.
I’ve been over it in my head so many times. For a couple months in the hospital, before I was back on solid food and not needing three nurses to help me shit, I couldn’t do anything else. I keep coming back to that split second of hesitation while I was blind, before I, correctly, took my size posture and likely angle the car would be coming from into account. I keep asking myself if I would be okay, or at least less broken, if I’d been faster. If I’d practiced my falls more as a kid.
So tell me. What should I have done? How could I have avoided being downrange?
Fucking tell me coward. Don’t just leave the conversation. Tell me.
Edit:I’m getting down votes, but no answers. What should I have done differently? How was this my fault? Give me solace, tell me what great civilizational achievements required I be sacrificed.
Out of mostly amusement to see what you come up with at this point, what makes cyclists not also a bullet for pedestrians in this scenario? Less heavy but can still be deadly to pedestrians.
Whataboutism then?