I’m a car driver and enthusiast and I’ll be the first one to ask… Why the fuck can my car reach 250kph if the highest speed limit in my country is 110kph???
Edit: If you think I’m complaining that I can’t go faster then you understood the message wrong
Driving fast in the right circumstances is a blast, no one is denying that. E.g., doing a track day, or even road racing on a closed course. But it’s not the same as driving in public day-to-day. Here in the US southwest, in order to drive a road race in the 150 mph/250 kph class, you need a 5 point harness, fire suppression system, helmet and HANS device.
You simply don’t need to go that fast on a daily basis. It’s not safe for you, without all the above precautions, and it’s not safe for others around you.
Auto manufacturers use the top speeds/acceleration/torque stats for marketing. Drivers imagine they will have fun going that fast (see above, they can!), they perceive value in having “better stats”, so the market rewards manufacturers to keep selling daily-driver cars that have unrealistic top speeds. Combine that with the fact that most people can’t afford to have a separate “fun” car, or access to safe locations for motor sports, and we end up seeing people trying to have the fun they imagined on our shared public roadways, which is downright dangerous for everyone.
Get your kicks on the track. Your car’s top speed does not belong on public roads.
Exactly! I think discussions have started to have speed limiters on new cars sold in Canada and it’s perfectly logical. Why let manufacturers sell cars that can reach speeds that will make people face criminal charges if they get caught? It’s ridiculous enough that we’re switching to electric cars with 0-100kph under 7 seconds and no one bats an eye… The next few decades will be interesting, imagine all the new drivers accidently launching from stop signs in a fairly basic car that does 0-100 in 6 seconds…
I think the best thing I ever did was learn on a 250cc. It’s way harder to wreck your day or get yourself killed when you inevitably grab a bit too much throttle as a complete newbie. I would even encourage people to learn on a 125cc or even 50cc. The basics are the basics and you can pick those up on a bike with less than 10hp just as easily if not more easily than a bike with 100+hp.
It would be amazing to see government mandated limiters in cars, in general, and not just for learners.
I know that a lot of people don’t agree with that but the public has proved they are incapable of driving within reasonable limits. No one needs a car that can go the speeds that cars are capable of going. It’s totally possible to setup a system that enforces the limit only on public roads so that people could still take their cars to the track. We very much have the technology.
It blows my mind that the general public is completely accepting of things like smartphone OSes that can spy on their every move and log their every detail yet if you mention limiters on cars all of the sudden they become staunch advocates for personal freedoms. The hypocrisy blows my mind.
Maybe… because it is dangerous to drive that fast when other people are around? Why don’t you just buy a car that can only go as fast as the highest speed limit?
Huh? What part of my message made you think I drive over the speed limit? I’m clearly saying that it’s ridiculous that cars are sold without speed limiters!
The second sentence can be read like you’re complaining you can only go 110 while your car could go 250, and I guess a lot of people understood it this way.
The problem here is not a lack of reading comprehension but rather a lack of you explaining yourself. You see, I could not really see the motivation behind your post because it was so ambiguous. So I think it is not really fair to blame anyone reading your text for not correctly interpreting it they way you wanted it.
This is the keyword for such a city. It should've gotten such a system already by now when reaching the first million. All these arab/middle eastern cities seem so extremely focused on car infrastructure to a rather disturbing degree. And all the carbrains I know think these cities are the pinacle of modern city development: all just gigantic glass skyscrapers and highways circling around them - nothing else.
Also, back on Facebook/Instagram, there's not a single person who had the money to visit Dubai once and post pictures from there (at least that I'm aware of), that is not car brained. I'm sure they all use their car everywhere and nothing less, they could even be doing their basic shopping from the corner store with it, I think.
All these arab/middle eastern cities seem so extremely focused on car infrastructure to a rather disturbing degree.
Not all cities, but I do understand your sentiment and it is echoed by many locally. Luckily the people in the top are aware they need to fix this. Though even if they ever did, who wants to walk when its 37C at night? Some cities have installed outdoor cooling.
So why is this? The answers so far seem unsatisfactory, since things like phones, SUVs and car-centric infrastructure are on the rise in other countries as well, without that staggering rise in deaths.
I spent about 3 minutes browsing the report linked in the article, and am rather less confident than before. For example, on pages 25 and 26 they look at the share of SUVs in deaths and sales. And while both figures are rising, the bodycount from non-SUVs has gone up as well.
The answer is probably not a single factor anyways. Can anyone make a more or less informed guess what might explain the US being so bad?
It’s worth noting that in most other rich countries, pedestrian deaths have been falling. And before anyone says something stupid about how America is uniquely big or new, even Canada has 60% fewer traffic fatalities.
Since this isn’t Reddit I find the likelihood of some dumbass coming in trying to claim that America is somehow uniquely exceptional is pretty low. Though I would grant that America’s exceptionally awful…
Alas, I’ve read tons of comments, even on this community, about how the US is “too big” for trains or walkable cities to work. I think the car-centric mindset cuts across the political spectrum — or put another way, the topic hasn’t been fully politicized yet.
It’s not just car-centric Euclidean zoning and suburban sprawl.
The US also builds really dangerous stroads that you don’t really see in most other countries.
5+ lanes of 55mph traffic next to a sidewalk and tons of driveways for businesses is inherently unsafe.
It’s also interesting to note that the biggest spike in fatalities was during the pandemic.
The best explanation I’ve heard is that bumper-to-bumper rush hour traffic essentially disappeared with the switch to WFH during the pandemic. Streets artificially looked safer pre-pandemic due to drivers getting stuck in traffic at peak periods. The pandemic just revealed how inherently unsafe American stroads are.
just this morning some idiot didn't want to stop at a crosswalk in a 25mph downtown area....
the car that stopped going the other direction happened to be a cop car (who incidentally almost got rear-ended by some other idiot not paying attention).
as i stepped onto the curb on the other side of the road, i saw red and blue flashing behind me and heard them on their PA ordering the driver to pull over and stop at the next corner.
In totally, completely, and in all ways unrelatedly: smartphones on the rise, gigantic pickups and suvs are on the rise, and tactile buttons you can hit without looking at a screen are on the decline.
and anecdotally it seems like since covid and not driving as much, everyone seems to have gotten worse at driving and still hasn’t quite picked it back up yet.
I was listening to a breakdown of this study on a New York Times podcast. It has to do with huge cultural differences between how Europeans and Americans interact with smartphones in cars, particularly because most cars in the United States are automatic and most cars in Europe are stick shifts, meaning that it’s very difficult for Europeans to screw around with her phones while they’re driving. Driving a car with a manual transmission requires both hands, meaning drivers, don’t have a free hand to fiddle with their phones.
Another part of the explanation for the difference between the United States and Europe in this regard is that suburban United States cities are designed in the auto age and designed very much around cars with a complete disregard for pedestrian safety, particularly at night. American pedestrians in these cities have to walk much farther and around much larger and more dangerous roads to get to their destinations, while having access to poor or even nonexistent transit networks. 
edit: one other data point they mentioned was the homeless, and while that population was rising in 2009, it sharply began to rise in 2016. these are people who are the most vulnerable in our society already, who often dwell near dangerous roads, highway overpasses, etc., and especially at night. Homeless people account for a significant portion of the increase in pedestrian fatalities in certain regions.
I was listening to a breakdown of this study on a New York Times podcast. It has to do with huge cultural differences between how Europeans and Americans interact with smartphones in cars
Funny thing, someone posted this Podcast, and there’s absolutely no mention at all about this: lemmy.ml/post/10124633
No, that is, in fact, a podcast by the New York Times. You do understand you can click on these things called links and then you’ll land on another page?
Oh, I can assure you that driving manual doesn’t keep people from dabbling with their phones… If anything, it makes it more dangerous, since… well you’ve only got two hands, right.
And automatic is becoming the norm here as well, at least with new cars.
I‘d say it has a variety of reasons. Cars are huge in the US, streets are wide, pedestrian safety is not really a thing, the driving exam is harder and more intensive here, and I feel just… safer.
For example, here I don’t really wait at a zebra crossing, I basically just step on the street and expect the cars to yield because they have to. I would never do that in the US…
according to the study, small cars have been responsible for just as many fatalities - or not an amount disproportionate to their number - in the US, so it’s not really big car problem as much as you might suppose. this may have to do with that drivers of small cars can often drive more recklessly, but that’s speculation. And, sure, you can fiddle with your phone with a manual transmission, but, seemingly, most don’t. The difficulty makes it far, far, less likely.
but the biggest takeaways from he study seems to be 1) modern road/highway infrastructure in the US is built to get as many cars moving as fast as possible and give little-to-no consideration to pedestrians or their safety, and this need to change, and 2) the particularly American culture around in-car smartphone use needs to change via far harsher penalties for distracted diving and other behaviors which endanger pedestrians.
Again, which study are you talking about? Neither this here nor the other article under which you also commented mention phones or automatic transmission at all.
What this analysis here does say though, that you’ve got a lot of DUIs with a BAC >0.08. In Europe, the max BAC 0.05 or lower.
I drive automatic in Europe. Simply it is illegal to have a mobile in your hand while driving. Fees are very high, and the license is suspended minimum 2 weeks
while i’m certain that automatic transmissions indeed do exist in Europe, i was simply referring to the fact that they’re far less common there.
but the fact that distracted driving is punished far more severely there, however, DOES have a major impact on how less common that habit is in European driver culture. also, probably, the culture of giving more of a damn about your fellow citiens than your average American does.
Modal transport design is probably a huge reason why this works. I would be interested to see the pedestrian deaths in a packed busy city like NYC vs the wide suburban roads of the rest of America.
My theory is that roads designed with the purpose of driving faster (designed with a higher modal level) are commonly placed within high pedestrian areas within the US (Stroads) and due to that higher modal mental state people are “comfortable” and thus use their phones as their brains are less occupied. While in a busy city street they’re in that 1st modal mental state so they are focused on their surroundings way more.
Can’t say for pedestrians specifically, but the variance of general traffic fatalities in the US is huge, and the average is way higher than the EUs: personalinjurysandiego.org/…/most-and-least-traff…
For reference, Mississippi does worse than Afghanistan, New York is comparable with the EU.
The way car companies are working around this legislation is why it’s so hard to find and buy smaller sized cars even if there is demand (think smart car size). It also makes our community’s less safe for pedestrian traffic and less enjoyable to walk.
As much as I celebrate metros… This city is built in the middle of a desert and only exists because of an immense amount of oil being burned to power gigantic desalination plants. It is hardly sustainable even with a metro.
I think fear grips people at every angle and none of us are brave enough to accept bold action for positive change in our society. It seems like most people are just retracting instead.
I vaguely remember that “Ye” (formerly Kanye West) once said something like he formed a think tank to build a city but the thing stopping his team was that “Ye” didn’t understand any of the concepts and he ran it into the ground.
I want public transportation, I think everyone wants it at this point but no no one understands why we need it. They all just want to escape.
(This message was brought to you by the new 2024 Ford Escape: just hit the road and escape to paradise)
There’s no comparison to the personal freedom of having a car versus being dependent on others to ferry you around. That’s why America will always be built around our great car infrastructure. We will never give up our freedom to roam our huge awesome land.
Nothing like freedom like actively removing people from having multiple choices of transit by making illegal to build anything that isn’t dependent on cars.
Nothing like freedom like being forced to spend thousands on a several ton machine to do any task outside your home.
Nothing like freedon like being forced to pay predatory insurance to private corporations in order to be legally allowed to drive your vehicle.
Nothing like freedom like being dependent on oil companies that actively lobby against you in order to drive the vehicle that you are forced to own.
Nothing like freedom like having infustructure that denies poor people and disabled people from participating in society.
Nothing like freedom like having no independence if you are too old, too young, too intoxicated, or too disabled to drive.
Nothing like freedom like being forced to have a license issued by your government in order to be independent.
Nothing like freedom like being forced to use a vehicle that spies on you and collects information such as your sexual activity, immigration status, ‘private’ conversations, location, and much more.
And here again we see the typical attempt to put words in somebody’s mouth. I never said anything about what poor people deserve, that’s your words, not mine.
When you don’t have a substantial rebuttal, you just make up a strawman argument.
IMO everyone, regardless of economic stature, deserves every form of freedom legitimately available in society. For this example, if a poor person couldn’t afford a car I would suggest a cheap used motorcycle. I’ve bought a couple of those, one was $900 and the other was $2500.
This is incredibly insane when you consider the cost incurred to maintain a vehicle. No poor person would do this in the right mind it would be nothing but a debt trap. It’s shameful that public transit is downright near illegal and most metropolitan areas in North America and it is the best solution get over it
You’re overestimating the cost to own a vehicle. My costs are very low overall. I spend about $50 a month on gas or less, and I have no car payments, and my insurance cost is about $100 per month. Total cost of ownership for my 2 vehicles is less than $200 per month, and I can drive them anywhere I want at any time.
I’ve both been poor and owned a few vehicles and $2000 repair bills happen, more than once in the life cycle of a car and much more than I could ever afford if I hadn’t been better off before I pulled the trigger in cars but down take my word for it John Oliver did a great peice on how bad of a debt trap they are on average
I would argue that a fast, frequent and comprehensive public transport system gives you more personal freedom. Being able to easily get around without having to worry about piloting a heavy vehicle, without the burden of maintenance, and being flexible once out due to not needing to worry about where you’re storing your car. Plug the gaps with (electric and/or cargo) bikes for shorter trips and car share for longer ones and you have a much better, more equitable transport system.
All public transport vehicles are heavier than my personal vehicle though. Also public transport doesn’t provide the freedom of choosing any destination that you want, and taking yourself there on your own schedule. That’s what I was talking about.
You aren’t piloting a public transport vehicle, a professional is and you are free to not worry about it.
A frequent and comprehensive public transport system does allow for that freedom, without all of the burdens of car ownership. Bikes and car share can be used to fill in the gaps when the public transport isn’t comprehensive enough.
fuck_cars
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.