▲ 230 ▼ Someone gets killed by a car, so they restrict e-bikes. (www.centraloregondaily.com) submitted 2 years ago by hanke@feddit.nu to c/fuckcars@lemmy.world 58 comments fedilink hide all child comments cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/13118199 (Title shamelessly stolen from this comment in the crossposted !micromobility thread.)
[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 42 points 2 years ago (2 children) People shouldnt need to be neon colored to not be killed on their commute. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] SuiXi3D@fedia.io 11 points 2 years ago I agree, but we don't live in that world. Until our governments start giving a shit, we gotta do what we gotta do. If we're going to be forced to share the road with two ton death machines, it only makes sense to ensure that they can at least see us. permalink fedilink source parent [+] ShadowRam@fedia.io -9 points 2 years ago (1 child) I'm not following your line of thinking. If we banished all cars, and people where on dedicated E-Bike/Bike roads, you assume dangerous collisions at night would just disappear? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] biddy@feddit.nl 14 points 2 years ago (2 children) Yes. Collisions are far less likely when the vehicles are smaller, and far less deadly when the vehicles are slower and less massive. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] ShadowRam@fedia.io -3 points 2 years ago (1 child) Collisions are far less likely when the vehicles are smaller Citation? Why would smaller mean less collisions? far less deadly when the vehicles are slower and less massive = Correct But both of your points have NOTHING to do with the topic "People shouldnt need to be neon colored" They still require to be more visible to each other when travelling at E-bike speeds at night. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] biddy@feddit.nl 6 points 2 years ago Why would smaller mean less collisions? Easier to dodge. Less physical area to hit. I'm not arguing that people shouldn't wear hi-viz, lights, ect. Of course they should. But we need to stop blaming cyclists when cars are the thing actually causing the harm. I'm trying to find a link to statistics on numbers of deadly crashes not involving a car, I recall seeing it somewhere and it was less than 1%. permalink fedilink source parent [–] mp2@lemmy.ml -5 points 2 years ago Delusional permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SuiXi3D@fedia.io 11 points 2 years ago I agree, but we don't live in that world. Until our governments start giving a shit, we gotta do what we gotta do. If we're going to be forced to share the road with two ton death machines, it only makes sense to ensure that they can at least see us. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] ShadowRam@fedia.io -9 points 2 years ago (1 child) I'm not following your line of thinking. If we banished all cars, and people where on dedicated E-Bike/Bike roads, you assume dangerous collisions at night would just disappear? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] biddy@feddit.nl 14 points 2 years ago (2 children) Yes. Collisions are far less likely when the vehicles are smaller, and far less deadly when the vehicles are slower and less massive. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] ShadowRam@fedia.io -3 points 2 years ago (1 child) Collisions are far less likely when the vehicles are smaller Citation? Why would smaller mean less collisions? far less deadly when the vehicles are slower and less massive = Correct But both of your points have NOTHING to do with the topic "People shouldnt need to be neon colored" They still require to be more visible to each other when travelling at E-bike speeds at night. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] biddy@feddit.nl 6 points 2 years ago Why would smaller mean less collisions? Easier to dodge. Less physical area to hit. I'm not arguing that people shouldn't wear hi-viz, lights, ect. Of course they should. But we need to stop blaming cyclists when cars are the thing actually causing the harm. I'm trying to find a link to statistics on numbers of deadly crashes not involving a car, I recall seeing it somewhere and it was less than 1%. permalink fedilink source parent [–] mp2@lemmy.ml -5 points 2 years ago Delusional permalink fedilink source parent
[–] biddy@feddit.nl 14 points 2 years ago (2 children) Yes. Collisions are far less likely when the vehicles are smaller, and far less deadly when the vehicles are slower and less massive. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] ShadowRam@fedia.io -3 points 2 years ago (1 child) Collisions are far less likely when the vehicles are smaller Citation? Why would smaller mean less collisions? far less deadly when the vehicles are slower and less massive = Correct But both of your points have NOTHING to do with the topic "People shouldnt need to be neon colored" They still require to be more visible to each other when travelling at E-bike speeds at night. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] biddy@feddit.nl 6 points 2 years ago Why would smaller mean less collisions? Easier to dodge. Less physical area to hit. I'm not arguing that people shouldn't wear hi-viz, lights, ect. Of course they should. But we need to stop blaming cyclists when cars are the thing actually causing the harm. I'm trying to find a link to statistics on numbers of deadly crashes not involving a car, I recall seeing it somewhere and it was less than 1%. permalink fedilink source parent [–] mp2@lemmy.ml -5 points 2 years ago Delusional permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ShadowRam@fedia.io -3 points 2 years ago (1 child) Collisions are far less likely when the vehicles are smaller Citation? Why would smaller mean less collisions? far less deadly when the vehicles are slower and less massive = Correct But both of your points have NOTHING to do with the topic "People shouldnt need to be neon colored" They still require to be more visible to each other when travelling at E-bike speeds at night. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] biddy@feddit.nl 6 points 2 years ago Why would smaller mean less collisions? Easier to dodge. Less physical area to hit. I'm not arguing that people shouldn't wear hi-viz, lights, ect. Of course they should. But we need to stop blaming cyclists when cars are the thing actually causing the harm. I'm trying to find a link to statistics on numbers of deadly crashes not involving a car, I recall seeing it somewhere and it was less than 1%. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] biddy@feddit.nl 6 points 2 years ago Why would smaller mean less collisions? Easier to dodge. Less physical area to hit. I'm not arguing that people shouldn't wear hi-viz, lights, ect. Of course they should. But we need to stop blaming cyclists when cars are the thing actually causing the harm. I'm trying to find a link to statistics on numbers of deadly crashes not involving a car, I recall seeing it somewhere and it was less than 1%. permalink fedilink source parent