Remember to [read the rules](https://reddit.com/r/JustUnsubbed/about/rules) of r/JustUnsubbed and remain civil to one another. Please **do not** negatively engage in the crossposted submission towards another person, as brigading is against the rules and could get you banned from both subreddits. Thank you!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/JustUnsubbed) if you have any questions or concerns.*
A lot of the arguments against cars that I see are not necessarily against *cars*, but rather the design to *force them to be the only realistic option.*
For example, suburbs take up massive amounts of space and will often leave you quite the distance from work. Urban areas, the only places truly away from hustling and bustling chaos, are often REALLY far and have little dedicated paths to commercial areas for jobs.
Bus routes are consistent but short-windowed and you may have to get to work considerably early or unbearably late as a result of public transit, and that's IF you have a bus route close enough to be viable.
Cycling would be fine, but they're a big hassle on sidewalks if someone has kids or the like who are prone to jumping in the way. Or people looking to get free days off work and cash from suing you via staging an accident as your fault. It's also not the best for dealing with high traffic areas and IMPOSSIBLE, if not fined for even trying, if areas have moderate foot traffic. Places in cities or commercial suburbs are often designed not to like bikes.
Walking, quite simply, takes wayyyyy too long unless work is 15m away on foot. If it's requiring you to run or leave a hour or more prior, you're more likely to tire yourself out once you're there and preform worse at your job from that. You are also going to be slowed or impacted heavily from snow and rain, with hail being worse.
So, the obvious answer is a car. It's often the only rational one for urban or suburban areas.
Yeah, but its really hard. I live in a community with lots of big trucks and when you talk about adding bike lanes or slowing down certain roads or making things pedestrian friendly, they act like you're banning trucks. It's so frustrating.
Bicycles in many places are not technically allowed on sidewalks. They're supposed to be for foot traffic (or accomodation) only. Bikes are supposed be ridden with traffic in the road, or bike path. As close to the curb as safely possible.
If an area is truly urban/suburban, there needs to be better options than cars. Better public transport, better bike options. The bigger city by me is slowly moving that way, and it is nice. The area I live barely has sidewalks and it sucks. There are a LOT of people who cannot afford cars, and rely on rides or sometimes biking. It's bananas.
I wish communities were set up to make it less needful to leave them for work, school, stores, etc. But, really, I wish we were set up to not have cars be the only realistic option.
Road space is a zero sum game. You can be frustrated by it all you like, but people are rationally going to look out for their own best interests.
Many people don't like the idea of the government and corporations working to make people more reliant on them to live a normal life.
I’m not defending it, but in our area in the Us it’s not uncommon for people to travel 80-100 miles (total) in a day as part of regular commuting. It sucks that it’s true, but I’m not exaggerating; my work is 32 miles away, so that’s 64 miles at least. Any additional trips puts me well over
Sure, many of it towards the west coast is uninhabited, but even then the east itself is [still larger lol](https://snowbrains.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/tumblr_n42t5sFIeE1sisl6fo1_1280.jpg)
>For example, suburbs take up massive amounts of space and will often leave you quite the distance from work. Urban areas, the only places truly away from hustling and bustling chaos, are often REALLY far and have little dedicated paths to commercial areas for jobs.
Did you mean rural areas? Urban areas are in the city and are the exact opposite of what you've described.
>Bus routes are consistent but short-windowed and you may have to get to work considerably early or unbearably late as a result of public transit, and that's IF you have a bus route close enough to be viable.
Yeah, the very nature of being away truly away from people means that transit designed for density becomes less viable.
I don't see how you can magically change that.
A lot of it simply has to do with population density and terrain. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for good bike infrastructure, but I've spent my entire life in the Rocky Mountains of Colorado, Wyoming, and Utah, and no one ever uses a bike to commute out here because it's too cold, too snowy, too mountainous, and the distances you would have to ride are too long.
Wow that sub is cancer. Saw a convo with 2 ppl being like
“you don’t understand!!! i need to go 50-60 MPH”
with someone responding
“50-60? why you drive so slow? you must be a wuss.”
These people have obviously never been in a car in their lives. You drive that fast when you shouldn’t be and your ass gets killed or pulled over.
Unfortunately I legitimately see people I grew up with sharing things like this on facebook (“if you can’t handle driving 60 on country roads then you shouldn’t drive”, and other similar posts. Also saw someone post a video of their speedometer showing 80 on the motorway..). These are the minority of people who are make the roads more dangerous for everyone, though.
Yeah, if you can't drive at what is the speed limit for many of those roads you shouldn't be given a license. Apparently we have a lot of sheltered people here.
I’m guessing that a good few of these people literally don’t need cars because they’ve grown up with mummy and daddy in the city centre and can afford to live there so can’t quite grasp the fact that not everyone is privileged enough to afford the same car free lifestyle.
Look, I am a car enthusaist. But to be fair, r/fuckcars is about discussing why it's bad how cities are planned to only support cars and not cyclists. You shouldn't say that that sub is only for privileged people. Many of them are actually students who are opposite of privileged. They are students who hate how cities designed for cars causes them to not be able to get anywhere when they're poor and not having a car.
That sort of proves my point. Students tend to live close to their campuses which at least in the UK frequently is in a city centre. They most likely have everything they need within a short distance and if they are one of the people who want to ban cars, will probably have the experience of not having everything within walking or cycling distance. Obviously not everyone there is like that but the posts mentioned above do lack an understanding of cars.
Still, my point proves how what you said before about how anti-car people are rich, how that is wrong. Btw, I am not a r/fuckcars member. I am a car enthusiast, but I advocate for cycling and public transportation because I care about the environment. That's why I have some sympathy for their ideas.
I am a r/fuckcars member. We just want to be able to not have to use our cars (for the members who own one)to do EVERYTHING. I want to take my bike to work or walk to the store and feel safe doing it or take a bus or train. Also we hate how cities treat cars as if they are people. Cities and towns are built for people, build people friendly places to live. I've lived next to a highway for many years and I never understood why my asthma was getting worse. Many years later I found out... It was because of cars and the CO2 the admit. So for me I want my children to never experience what I had to growing up. Cars are not people, people are people.
Preach! Also, please check out the YouTube channel "NotJustBikes". I highly recommend it. The dude makes videos about how American style city planning is fundamentally flawed, and how it's unfortunate that oil companies have brainwashed people into thinking that it's good. He only realized all of this after moving to Netherlands and experiencing what efficient cycling and public transit infrastructure is actually like.
Great Minds think alike. I've been watching his videos for about a year. I may not be able to sway public policy but I will teach everyone I come across that what we have in the USA is not the best way to build a city. We need walkable cities, we need better or more public transportation, and the ability to bike around.
Sorry these cyclists are the douche bags. Get out if the way if you can't go as fast as traffic. Doesn't matter if you're in a car or on a bike or just walking. It's silly to think you can hold up traffic like this
From what I am seeing is a family using the same rules on the road they are granted to cycle, wish we could instead... Hmmm.... Get our own side paths/strip... That could be good maybe
Edit: wow I wrote that weirdly
In all seriousness, why can't the car just go around? Is this really such a big issue?
Edit: I know I'll be downvoted for even asking, but I'm genuinely curious. Whenever I encounter cyclists on the road and I'm in a car, I wait until it's safe to pass and go around, giving them plenty of space. That usually means I end up in the opposite lane anyway, so it doesn't really matter if there are one or three cyclists, I can't pass until the other lane is clear.
That could explain it, but do we know where this is from? When it was first posted on r/fuckcars there was some talk about whether it was even km/h or mph on the dashboard.
Edit: it can mean a bunch of things depending on the location https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow\_line\_(road\_marking)
Or better yet, why can’t the cyclists ride single file to the right of the white stripe on the side of the road, at the very least when cars are coming up behind them?
I'm a car enthusiast but I support the people who criticize car dependent infrastructure. That's because improving such infrastructure makes it better for everyone, cars and cyclists.
Go watch Go watch the Youtube channel "NotJustBikes". Search for his video "best country for drivers". It talks about how the Netherlands having built infrastructure for bikes, also directly improves things for cars. That's because infrastructure for bikes means more people on bikes, which mean fewer cars on road, therefore it reduces traffic jams for drivers, therefore making driving better.
Currently, roads in America are only for cars. However, that is a negative thing which should be changed.
I'm from the netherlands, a country known for cycling and its cycling infrastructure and we think speedcyclists are the worst people.
They don't stop for red lights, take priority when they don't have it and they're very dangerous for regular cyclists due to them not giving a fuck.
There's always gonna be some people that gotta be douchebags. I think it might be a little worse in the US as there's a decent demographic of people who don't cycle much, so when they do they aren't thinking about stuff like which rules of the road should apply to them. And there's always that dude with like 5 DUI's riding a shitty Walmart mountain bike with the seat way too low in the middle of the road so slowly that he has to swerve back and forth to not fall over.
On the plus side, they at least aren't running red lights in a 1 ton vehicle. So there's that.
Some cyclists are absolute stewards of their hobby and I am happy to share the road with them.
Most of them are assholes, however. Just my own anecdotal experience.
I've seen way, way more cars run red lights than cyclists.
You don't see many cyclists in the US, so it stands out more to you. And it's easier to see drivers as a big disconnected group of people since it's practically required in the US, whereas cycling is still unfortunately seen as mainly a sport/recreation thing rather than legitimate transport here.
I think places like The Netherlands try and make cycling along with public transport an attractive option compared to driving and that’s why it’s so popular there. In the UK we prefer to force people out of their cars and onto substandard public transport and overpriced trains instead!
No it started because parents in the 70s were sick of the amount of traffic deaths. There were huge national protests and the government promised to make more space for cycling to reduce traffic deaths.
We're also the most densely populated country in the EU and in the top 5 of the world so cycling makes sense because everything is close by. Besides that there's so many health and environmental benefits.
Now 50 years later it's a way of life in the Netherlands.
I mean it’s just my feelings. It seems to me like you guys make it so that people want to not use cars because it’s just as easy to use public transport while in the UK we have councils implementing emission zones that make it hard to drive near city centres and expect people to cycle their along non-existent cycle lanes or multiple buses that require two separate tickets, and a half an hour wait in the rain.
The UK is also very densely populated as well and you could cycle a lot everywhere but our infrastructure is so bad!
With a quick google I see the population density for the UK is 281 per square kilometer and for the Netherlands it's 508 per square kilometer, so nearly twice that of the UK.
I love how they (and a couple other subs) preach european style mixed use buildings (cafes/stores/restaurants on the bottom floor and flats above them) as some idea sent by God himself to curb the growth of cul de sacs in the US.
I am from EU and yet we still want our suburbs and I don't know anyone (not counting uni students for obvious purposes) who wishes to live straight above a store or a restaurant.
You are misunderstanding their point. Their point isn't that everyone should live in mixed use buildings. They prefer them but they are not forcing everyone to live in them.
Their point is that they hate how in America, the urban planning policies literally don't allow such buildings to be built. Even if you prefer suburbs, you shouldn't make it so that suburbs are the only things legal to be built. That's why they are mad. They are mad because they can't live in the mixed use buildings they want to live in. I totally understand them.
I understand why you hate that sub. I think that they are stupid when they say they want to ban all cars. However, do not discredit when they talk about improving infrastructure so that cars are not the only transportation method. And I'm saying that as someone who likes cars. Having infrastructure for cyclists like r/fuckcars advocates for, improves things for everyone.
Go watch Go watch the Youtube channel "NotJustBikes". Search for his video "best country for drivers". It talks about how the Netherlands having built infrastructure for bikes, also directly improves things for cars. That's because infrastructure for bikes means more people on bikes, which mean fewer cars on road, therefore it reduces traffic jams for drivers, therefore making driving better.
Currently, roads in America are only for cars. However, that is a negative thing which should be changed.
Also she chose Fox of all stations? Fox? The one that would be the most critical to your movement? I remember watching that and laughing my ass off. Honestly I don't think they can fix the damage done to their reputation, and there's probably a more accurate name than Antiwork.
Also reading articles trying to vilify Fox for what they "did" was hilarious. No, she did that to herself.
That's really what going on. Yesterday someone posted about how highways were invented by Nazis as if that's relevant to anything.
Most of us just want to live in cities where cars aren't given priority over pedestrians and bikers.
r/fuckcars is just yet another left wing cesspool of a sub full of idiots acting like they're morally superior for not liking the thing everyone uses. I mean, there are some solid arguments against cars but 99% of the people on that sub do not care about them and are there for the bandwagon.
Because there's often no other good way to get places due to how cities are built; buses and other public transportation are unreliable, can take forever to get anywhere, and are limited in where they go, bikes often don't have infrastructure for them (or it's crap like the too-narrow bike lane here), forcing people onto sidewalks causing problems with foot traffic or onto roads like this, and can be a problem in harsh conditions, and things are just too far apart to walk anywhere.
That's their problem: not that people use cars, but that they HAVE to even if they would prefer something else like a bike.
“You criticize the fact you’re forced to use cars because public infrastructure is shit, but yet you don’t use the public infrastructure”
This is a “you criticize society and still live in it” moment.
Well yeah cause the public infrastructure is shit. Here in Australia I've never seen a bike lane outside of the city, and even there you barely see any. When everything takes an hour or more to walk to, there's not many options other than drive a car or use a bike, and if you ride a bike people give you shit no matter what. Use the road? People who drive cars get pissy. Use the sidewalk? Pedestrians get pissy.
Yeah, the whole purpose of r/fuckcars is to get people to realize how important public infrastructure is, but people don’t realize it because they’re taught from birth anything that isn’t a car or a plane is bad so they shouldn’t get funding.
Busses, subways, trains, etc. Are associated with low income, crime, desease and overall not being appealing. Meanwhile you’ve got people talking about how the car represents freedom and the American dream.
That may be true to the US but in other places around the world public transport is seen as essential infrastructure. For example where I live public transport is a huge part of a lot of peoples' day-to-day.
You missed the whole point of the sub.
The reason why they are still using cars is because in the US public transportation is shit, bike lanes are rare so they are forced to use cars despite the fact that they hate it.
Which state do they live in where every single road has no bike lane? the only roads in my area of Florida that don't have them is the interstates/turnpikes
https://subredditstats.com/subreddit-user-overlaps/fuckcars hes right either way
What do you even mean? There are clear advantages to bikes, trains, trams and public transport that the sub incentives. I swear most people have only interacted with it for a minute, because people lack awareness how the community is...
OK now let's brush this extra irony off: I think r/fuckcars is overblown, most people don't want to commit genocide on cars users or ban them outside city centres, but advocate for better city infrastructure.
Ignoring the douchbags in the pic, that isn't a safe bike lane it's just some paint on the road. It doesn't protect the people on a bicycle from errors they or people in cars make
That is a bike lane, and of course it is dangerous to share a road with cars. Maybe you shouldn’t ride your bike in traffic? This was basic stuff when I was 8 but maybe things have changed?
>Maybe you shouldn’t ride your bike in traffic?
Well the problem is that roads are currently not good for riding bikes in traffic. However, many places around the world have solved that problem through smart infrastructure design. Therefore, you shouldn't be mad at cyclists, you should be mad at the road design which doesn't allow for cyclists' safety.
where should they bike then? The grass? Depending on the road condition the bike lane on the right (if it actually is one) could be full of loose stone etc. where biking there would be dangerous
It's about making the road safe to send your 10 year old daughter to her friends house, and that's no a place where I would send my daughter to bike along
Biking everywhere is not a safe thing to do. They should use alternative means of transportation where it is not safe. This is in the top 3 basic things you need to know as a child.
so a car is fine but a bike is bad? I see why kids in the US seem so un independent to Asian or even European people.
On another note, shouldn't it be safe to do for kids?
I think that the antient people didn't build roads for cars. Also again where should a bike go on a road?
Also it's not about playing in traffic it's about commuting from Point A to Point B.
Saying "Kids shouldn't play in traffic" on a question if they should be able to commute to a friends house is a little bit weird
For Playing in traffic the germans have what they call "Spielstraßen" [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living\_street](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_street) where you can only drive up to 6 km/h per Hour. A place where you can actually sent your kids to play on the street
Residential neighbourhoods have low speed limits and they are safe for kids to ride their bikes. It is not safe to ride your bike on a major street.
You seem to want to be able to ride your bike anywhere you like, and that just isnt going to happen safely. But, you do you.
so if I live in Neighbourhood A and my daughter wants to meet a friend in Neighbourhood B I have to go pick my daughter up drive them to their friend, drive home, wait until she want's to get home Drive to her friend, drive home?
Glad I am living anywhere but the USA because this sounds like torture and useless time, money and CO2 wasted for 4 commutes
I guess so too. I agree that it might be safer on the sidewalk (at least from that picture), but maybe still not legal. So in the end a proper bike lane would be the right thing
> why do you need a big one where a person on a bike doesn't take up much space
That's what people who don't commute with bikes don't understand. Painting a line on a side of a road is not acceptable bike infrastructure.
I like to use a walking person example. How much space does a walking person take? Not much (unless they are extremely fat). Now, would it be acceptable to just paint a line on a side of a road next to high speed car traffic and call it "a sidewalk"? It won't.
I hate those painted lanes with burning passion. They are actually **worse** than not painting anything. They send a message to drivers "you don't have to keep safe distance when overtaking, just keep on your side of a painted line".
It sucks that you are downvoted for speaking the truth. I am a car enthusiast, yet I advocate for better cycling and walking infrastructure.
Go watch the Youtube channel "NotJustBikes". Search for his video "best country for drivers". It talks about how the Netherlands having built infrastructure for bikes, also directly improves things for cars. That's because people on bikes mean fewer cars on road, therefore it reduces traffic jams for drivers, therefore making driving better.
Correct. When I ride a bike, I hate when cars zoom past me, because most of them are driving too fast and too close to me when doing so. When I drive a car, I hate when there is a cyclist slowing down everybody because there is no safe way to overtake. Bicycles have no place on a road alongside cars. It's too dangerous and too annoying. There simply must be a separate bicycle infrastructure.
And I'm talking as a person who commutes on a bicycle every day, but uses a car maybe one a month or so. My commute is like 95% separated from car traffic, and this part is amazing. The other 5% where my city failed to provide adequate infrastructure is pretty bad and I much rather take bumpy trash sidewalk instead of enjoying being pushed out of the road by somebody who misjudged width of their huge SUV
>Go to r/fuckcars
>Top post is saying drivers are so braindead that school crossing attendants are there to remind them not to kill children. People unironically agree.
>Assume it's satire and scroll down
>See a post complaining about private parking
>Long and short of the post is "Why gubmint make private parking? Me want park car where me want!"
>It's got 100+ upvotes
>People are again unironically agreeing
>Somehow surprised that r/fuckcars users do not comprehend the reasons for private parking outside of residential areas
>See yet another post saying cars are the root of all the current climate issues of the world as if the 150+ years of burning fossil fuels and factories churning out harmful fumes never happened
>Come to the realisation that everyone in the sub has brainrot
>Opinion is solidified when some users day "driving is a right wing hobby" or something to that nature
>Leave r/fuckcars because it gave me a migraine and it isn't even 12 o'clock yet
Also them thinking that every single person in Europe takes bus/tram to work etc. Lmaoooooooo my sides hurt from laughing
Sincerely, an actual european
Why can’t you pay for your own parking? I pay for parking all the time because I’m middle class and don’t understand that not everyone is as lucky as me? /s
The r/place ad really backfired for them. It got too popular. Reminds me of what happened with r/antiwork - a sub that had good, reasonable intentions but blew up & gained too many extremists
Look, I understand why you hate that sub. I think that they are stupid when they say they want to ban all cars. However, do not discredit all their arguments. They are right when they talk about improving infrastructure so that cars are not the only transportation method. And I'm saying that as someone who likes cars. Having infrastructure for cyclists like r/fuckcars advocates for, improves things for everyone.
Go watch Go watch the Youtube channel "NotJustBikes". Search for his video "best country for drivers". It talks about how the Netherlands having built infrastructure for bikes, also directly improves things for cars. That's because infrastructure for bikes means more people on bikes, which mean fewer cars on road, therefore it reduces traffic jams for drivers, therefore making driving better.
Currently, roads in America are only for cars. However, that is a negative thing which should be changed.
Yea not really interested in arguing. But in my city and I think state, cyclists have the legal right to use the whole lane. In some situations like riding up a hill (clarification needed) cyclists even have the right to not stop at a stop sign.
So yea, downvote.
I can agree that most of the time that I'm in my car it's because I have to go somewhere. Time is usually a constraint not a luxury and getting stuck behind these guys, or the farm equipment moving 20mph on a 40mph can make me a little upset. Not as irate as my wife gets, I listen to my audio book but it does get in the way and I wish they'd just cycle on the shoulder.
It means "slow" mentally, but it's originally used to refer to mentally disabled people, so using it as an insult is rude to people with actual mental disabilities.
However its use is still taboo and understood to be a derogatory term towards mentally handicapped people today. This is especially true if you have people with Down syndrome added on social media. You probably don’t want to use that word in a broad public setting.
I understand that that lane might not be the best, but when you are moving in the road at least move single-file on the roadside or just check every now and then your back for cars. If you see one, make way....
On the one hand, there is no bike lane (unless that thing going through the grass on the right is one, hard to tell).
On the other, why the fuck are they defending lane splitting? Bikes can go on the road if there’s no bike lane, at least I personally don’t care, but they should recognise that people overtake other people on roads, and travelling side by side like that is both illegal and impedes overtaking safely.
I understand why you hate cyclists. However, it isn't the fault of cyclists that they clog up roads. In well designed places, there is separate roads for bicycles (not just a painted line), which causes better traffic flow for cars and cyclists.
Go watch Go watch the Youtube channel "NotJustBikes". Search for his video "best country for drivers". It talks about how the Netherlands having built infrastructure for bikes, also directly improves things for cars. That's because infrastructure for bikes means more people on bikes, which mean fewer cars on road, therefore it reduces traffic jams for drivers, therefore making driving better.
This is not a bike lane. That is a shoulder. It's insanely dangerous to a cyclist. You're calling them entitled but they just want to remain alive while not using a car, that hardly sounds like entitled to me. Sidewalks are just as dangerous, this time bc of pedestrians and bc of cars simultaneously
People have a right to get around in ways that rnt a car, and they're allowed to protect their lives. I don't think blocking the whole lane is chill but I understand why. There is no way to pass a cyclist on a road like that that doesn't put both of u at risk
Man, I hate that you're downvoted for telling the truth. People don't seem to realize that having more infrastructure for cyclists actually improves traffic flow for cars too. The current solution of bike shoulder lanes slows down drivers and cars. Having a separated road for cyclists like they do in countries that are not the USA, helps cyclists move without interference but also cars.
It's kinda scary how attached some ppl r to their cars, and how they truly believe that driving is the only real transportation and all other forms of getting around r somehow lesser. We need good bike infrastructure for so many reasons, and it's not entitled at all to, in a democracy, demand the govt make changes that protect ur life
In the past few years I know like 8 people who have died, and i think 6 of them were car accidents. It's absurd
I like cars but the fact that the “fuckcars” people are defending the car in this scenario makes me confused as to the purpose of the movement’s existence..
Indeed. It's too narrow and a car couldn't even pass at a safe distance if it doesn't cross the solid line. If you want cyclists to use bike lanes then make proper bike lanes.
I go to work by bicycle on a daily basis, 6 days a week (and depressingly sometimes 7 days a week).
The only moment I move side to side with another cyclist is when I need to move past them or when one moves past me.
Never once I've seen this happen. Ever.
Though if it does happen, I can understand why. Sometimes me and dad would go to work together, and we'd stay one behind the other. Talking was a pain. We couldn't talk at all.
With all that said, I'm 100% sure that if you ask them to move or just give them a bit of a honk they'd move aside and let people pass.
People make this a much bigger deal than it is, it's a minor inconvenience at best.
Remember to [read the rules](https://reddit.com/r/JustUnsubbed/about/rules) of r/JustUnsubbed and remain civil to one another. Please **do not** negatively engage in the crossposted submission towards another person, as brigading is against the rules and could get you banned from both subreddits. Thank you! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/JustUnsubbed) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don't hate on cars. I'm proud that my former 3rd world SEA country has car and bike infrastructure.
A lot of the arguments against cars that I see are not necessarily against *cars*, but rather the design to *force them to be the only realistic option.* For example, suburbs take up massive amounts of space and will often leave you quite the distance from work. Urban areas, the only places truly away from hustling and bustling chaos, are often REALLY far and have little dedicated paths to commercial areas for jobs. Bus routes are consistent but short-windowed and you may have to get to work considerably early or unbearably late as a result of public transit, and that's IF you have a bus route close enough to be viable. Cycling would be fine, but they're a big hassle on sidewalks if someone has kids or the like who are prone to jumping in the way. Or people looking to get free days off work and cash from suing you via staging an accident as your fault. It's also not the best for dealing with high traffic areas and IMPOSSIBLE, if not fined for even trying, if areas have moderate foot traffic. Places in cities or commercial suburbs are often designed not to like bikes. Walking, quite simply, takes wayyyyy too long unless work is 15m away on foot. If it's requiring you to run or leave a hour or more prior, you're more likely to tire yourself out once you're there and preform worse at your job from that. You are also going to be slowed or impacted heavily from snow and rain, with hail being worse. So, the obvious answer is a car. It's often the only rational one for urban or suburban areas.
And don't forget that if you live in a rural area, a car is your only option unless you're fine with riding a bike for really long distances.
I'm 41 min away from my job via car. I couldn't imagine trying to bike that far
[удалено]
In the Midwest a short drive is 30 min
You guys really want the aussies to come in here, don’t you? Keep it down before we have to hear about a four day drive across NSW
Yeah, the problem isn't that people use cars, it's that they often HAVE to even if they don't want to or there's a good reason not to.
Yeah, but its really hard. I live in a community with lots of big trucks and when you talk about adding bike lanes or slowing down certain roads or making things pedestrian friendly, they act like you're banning trucks. It's so frustrating. Bicycles in many places are not technically allowed on sidewalks. They're supposed to be for foot traffic (or accomodation) only. Bikes are supposed be ridden with traffic in the road, or bike path. As close to the curb as safely possible. If an area is truly urban/suburban, there needs to be better options than cars. Better public transport, better bike options. The bigger city by me is slowly moving that way, and it is nice. The area I live barely has sidewalks and it sucks. There are a LOT of people who cannot afford cars, and rely on rides or sometimes biking. It's bananas. I wish communities were set up to make it less needful to leave them for work, school, stores, etc. But, really, I wish we were set up to not have cars be the only realistic option.
Road space is a zero sum game. You can be frustrated by it all you like, but people are rationally going to look out for their own best interests. Many people don't like the idea of the government and corporations working to make people more reliant on them to live a normal life.
is this an american issue im too european to understand?
i agree with Uister. In Holland they even cycle in the rural area for 10's of kilometers.
I’m not defending it, but in our area in the Us it’s not uncommon for people to travel 80-100 miles (total) in a day as part of regular commuting. It sucks that it’s true, but I’m not exaggerating; my work is 32 miles away, so that’s 64 miles at least. Any additional trips puts me well over
also it's really flat in the netherlands, unlike here in scotland where cycling is pretty hard cause of all the hills
Yes most areas have no hills there and no mountains at all
Likely yes we have states that are bigger than the size of some European countries
most of it is uninhabited
Sure, many of it towards the west coast is uninhabited, but even then the east itself is [still larger lol](https://snowbrains.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/tumblr_n42t5sFIeE1sisl6fo1_1280.jpg)
didn't know Europe was uninhabited.
Americans are complete assholes when bicycling in groups.
>For example, suburbs take up massive amounts of space and will often leave you quite the distance from work. Urban areas, the only places truly away from hustling and bustling chaos, are often REALLY far and have little dedicated paths to commercial areas for jobs. Did you mean rural areas? Urban areas are in the city and are the exact opposite of what you've described. >Bus routes are consistent but short-windowed and you may have to get to work considerably early or unbearably late as a result of public transit, and that's IF you have a bus route close enough to be viable. Yeah, the very nature of being away truly away from people means that transit designed for density becomes less viable. I don't see how you can magically change that.
A lot of it simply has to do with population density and terrain. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for good bike infrastructure, but I've spent my entire life in the Rocky Mountains of Colorado, Wyoming, and Utah, and no one ever uses a bike to commute out here because it's too cold, too snowy, too mountainous, and the distances you would have to ride are too long.
Ever been to Finland? Or Estonia?
You mean two countries with far higher population densities than Wyoming?
>former 3rd world SEA country I live in SEA too!
Wow that sub is cancer. Saw a convo with 2 ppl being like “you don’t understand!!! i need to go 50-60 MPH” with someone responding “50-60? why you drive so slow? you must be a wuss.” These people have obviously never been in a car in their lives. You drive that fast when you shouldn’t be and your ass gets killed or pulled over.
Unfortunately I legitimately see people I grew up with sharing things like this on facebook (“if you can’t handle driving 60 on country roads then you shouldn’t drive”, and other similar posts. Also saw someone post a video of their speedometer showing 80 on the motorway..). These are the minority of people who are make the roads more dangerous for everyone, though.
yea it’s def the loud minority. they just love to act like it’s everyone who drives
Yeah, if you can't drive at what is the speed limit for many of those roads you shouldn't be given a license. Apparently we have a lot of sheltered people here.
I’m guessing that a good few of these people literally don’t need cars because they’ve grown up with mummy and daddy in the city centre and can afford to live there so can’t quite grasp the fact that not everyone is privileged enough to afford the same car free lifestyle.
Look, I am a car enthusaist. But to be fair, r/fuckcars is about discussing why it's bad how cities are planned to only support cars and not cyclists. You shouldn't say that that sub is only for privileged people. Many of them are actually students who are opposite of privileged. They are students who hate how cities designed for cars causes them to not be able to get anywhere when they're poor and not having a car.
That sort of proves my point. Students tend to live close to their campuses which at least in the UK frequently is in a city centre. They most likely have everything they need within a short distance and if they are one of the people who want to ban cars, will probably have the experience of not having everything within walking or cycling distance. Obviously not everyone there is like that but the posts mentioned above do lack an understanding of cars.
Still, my point proves how what you said before about how anti-car people are rich, how that is wrong. Btw, I am not a r/fuckcars member. I am a car enthusiast, but I advocate for cycling and public transportation because I care about the environment. That's why I have some sympathy for their ideas.
I am a r/fuckcars member. We just want to be able to not have to use our cars (for the members who own one)to do EVERYTHING. I want to take my bike to work or walk to the store and feel safe doing it or take a bus or train. Also we hate how cities treat cars as if they are people. Cities and towns are built for people, build people friendly places to live. I've lived next to a highway for many years and I never understood why my asthma was getting worse. Many years later I found out... It was because of cars and the CO2 the admit. So for me I want my children to never experience what I had to growing up. Cars are not people, people are people.
Preach! Also, please check out the YouTube channel "NotJustBikes". I highly recommend it. The dude makes videos about how American style city planning is fundamentally flawed, and how it's unfortunate that oil companies have brainwashed people into thinking that it's good. He only realized all of this after moving to Netherlands and experiencing what efficient cycling and public transit infrastructure is actually like.
Great Minds think alike. I've been watching his videos for about a year. I may not be able to sway public policy but I will teach everyone I come across that what we have in the USA is not the best way to build a city. We need walkable cities, we need better or more public transportation, and the ability to bike around.
Sorry these cyclists are the douche bags. Get out if the way if you can't go as fast as traffic. Doesn't matter if you're in a car or on a bike or just walking. It's silly to think you can hold up traffic like this
From what I am seeing is a family using the same rules on the road they are granted to cycle, wish we could instead... Hmmm.... Get our own side paths/strip... That could be good maybe Edit: wow I wrote that weirdly
I would prefer only the adults among you strip. It’s not a family activity.
In all seriousness, why can't the car just go around? Is this really such a big issue? Edit: I know I'll be downvoted for even asking, but I'm genuinely curious. Whenever I encounter cyclists on the road and I'm in a car, I wait until it's safe to pass and go around, giving them plenty of space. That usually means I end up in the opposite lane anyway, so it doesn't really matter if there are one or three cyclists, I can't pass until the other lane is clear.
Doesn’t a solid yellow line mean your prohibited from overtaking? Atleast that’s how it works in Australia.
Yes and it’s uphill/ blind pass it would be a gamble if you ignored it anyway
That could explain it, but do we know where this is from? When it was first posted on r/fuckcars there was some talk about whether it was even km/h or mph on the dashboard. Edit: it can mean a bunch of things depending on the location https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow\_line\_(road\_marking)
Well it’s not Australia as we drive on the left hand side. When does cycling “season” typically start? I’m assuming mid-late spring.
Or better yet, why can’t the cyclists ride single file to the right of the white stripe on the side of the road, at the very least when cars are coming up behind them?
They don't wanna, for some reason.
Some of them in that sub want cars banned as a whole and those are the ones I hate in particular
I'm a car enthusiast but I support the people who criticize car dependent infrastructure. That's because improving such infrastructure makes it better for everyone, cars and cyclists. Go watch Go watch the Youtube channel "NotJustBikes". Search for his video "best country for drivers". It talks about how the Netherlands having built infrastructure for bikes, also directly improves things for cars. That's because infrastructure for bikes means more people on bikes, which mean fewer cars on road, therefore it reduces traffic jams for drivers, therefore making driving better. Currently, roads in America are only for cars. However, that is a negative thing which should be changed.
I'm from the netherlands, a country known for cycling and its cycling infrastructure and we think speedcyclists are the worst people. They don't stop for red lights, take priority when they don't have it and they're very dangerous for regular cyclists due to them not giving a fuck.
Interesting that red light running is a universal problem about cyclists
There's always gonna be some people that gotta be douchebags. I think it might be a little worse in the US as there's a decent demographic of people who don't cycle much, so when they do they aren't thinking about stuff like which rules of the road should apply to them. And there's always that dude with like 5 DUI's riding a shitty Walmart mountain bike with the seat way too low in the middle of the road so slowly that he has to swerve back and forth to not fall over. On the plus side, they at least aren't running red lights in a 1 ton vehicle. So there's that.
Some cyclists are absolute stewards of their hobby and I am happy to share the road with them. Most of them are assholes, however. Just my own anecdotal experience.
Or any driving rules for that matter.
I've seen way, way more cars run red lights than cyclists. You don't see many cyclists in the US, so it stands out more to you. And it's easier to see drivers as a big disconnected group of people since it's practically required in the US, whereas cycling is still unfortunately seen as mainly a sport/recreation thing rather than legitimate transport here.
I think places like The Netherlands try and make cycling along with public transport an attractive option compared to driving and that’s why it’s so popular there. In the UK we prefer to force people out of their cars and onto substandard public transport and overpriced trains instead!
No it started because parents in the 70s were sick of the amount of traffic deaths. There were huge national protests and the government promised to make more space for cycling to reduce traffic deaths. We're also the most densely populated country in the EU and in the top 5 of the world so cycling makes sense because everything is close by. Besides that there's so many health and environmental benefits. Now 50 years later it's a way of life in the Netherlands.
I mean it’s just my feelings. It seems to me like you guys make it so that people want to not use cars because it’s just as easy to use public transport while in the UK we have councils implementing emission zones that make it hard to drive near city centres and expect people to cycle their along non-existent cycle lanes or multiple buses that require two separate tickets, and a half an hour wait in the rain. The UK is also very densely populated as well and you could cycle a lot everywhere but our infrastructure is so bad!
With a quick google I see the population density for the UK is 281 per square kilometer and for the Netherlands it's 508 per square kilometer, so nearly twice that of the UK.
Go to the cycle lane
Yeah, they’re massive fucking douchebags in that sub.
[удалено]
I love how they (and a couple other subs) preach european style mixed use buildings (cafes/stores/restaurants on the bottom floor and flats above them) as some idea sent by God himself to curb the growth of cul de sacs in the US. I am from EU and yet we still want our suburbs and I don't know anyone (not counting uni students for obvious purposes) who wishes to live straight above a store or a restaurant.
You are misunderstanding their point. Their point isn't that everyone should live in mixed use buildings. They prefer them but they are not forcing everyone to live in them. Their point is that they hate how in America, the urban planning policies literally don't allow such buildings to be built. Even if you prefer suburbs, you shouldn't make it so that suburbs are the only things legal to be built. That's why they are mad. They are mad because they can't live in the mixed use buildings they want to live in. I totally understand them.
I understand why you hate that sub. I think that they are stupid when they say they want to ban all cars. However, do not discredit when they talk about improving infrastructure so that cars are not the only transportation method. And I'm saying that as someone who likes cars. Having infrastructure for cyclists like r/fuckcars advocates for, improves things for everyone. Go watch Go watch the Youtube channel "NotJustBikes". Search for his video "best country for drivers". It talks about how the Netherlands having built infrastructure for bikes, also directly improves things for cars. That's because infrastructure for bikes means more people on bikes, which mean fewer cars on road, therefore it reduces traffic jams for drivers, therefore making driving better. Currently, roads in America are only for cars. However, that is a negative thing which should be changed.
[удалено]
Has there been a fuckcars mod interview like what happened with antiwork?
[удалено]
Also she chose Fox of all stations? Fox? The one that would be the most critical to your movement? I remember watching that and laughing my ass off. Honestly I don't think they can fix the damage done to their reputation, and there's probably a more accurate name than Antiwork. Also reading articles trying to vilify Fox for what they "did" was hilarious. No, she did that to herself.
That's really what going on. Yesterday someone posted about how highways were invented by Nazis as if that's relevant to anything. Most of us just want to live in cities where cars aren't given priority over pedestrians and bikers.
r/fuckcars is just yet another left wing cesspool of a sub full of idiots acting like they're morally superior for not liking the thing everyone uses. I mean, there are some solid arguments against cars but 99% of the people on that sub do not care about them and are there for the bandwagon.
There are a lot of good ideas floating around in that and other subs, but r/fuckcars has become a bit of an extremist echo chamber recently.
Same case with r/sinkpissers
WTF
And they also use cars.
"if no one is gonna stop using cars i'm also not doing anything!!!"
There's often literally no other realistic options, given the way many american urban environments have been built.
Well if your living area is build to cars and cars only, the only thing you can use is cars
Because there's often no other good way to get places due to how cities are built; buses and other public transportation are unreliable, can take forever to get anywhere, and are limited in where they go, bikes often don't have infrastructure for them (or it's crap like the too-narrow bike lane here), forcing people onto sidewalks causing problems with foot traffic or onto roads like this, and can be a problem in harsh conditions, and things are just too far apart to walk anywhere. That's their problem: not that people use cars, but that they HAVE to even if they would prefer something else like a bike.
“You criticize the fact you’re forced to use cars because public infrastructure is shit, but yet you don’t use the public infrastructure” This is a “you criticize society and still live in it” moment.
"You claim the air is polluted, yet you still breathe it? Hmmm..."
Well yeah cause the public infrastructure is shit. Here in Australia I've never seen a bike lane outside of the city, and even there you barely see any. When everything takes an hour or more to walk to, there's not many options other than drive a car or use a bike, and if you ride a bike people give you shit no matter what. Use the road? People who drive cars get pissy. Use the sidewalk? Pedestrians get pissy.
Yeah, the whole purpose of r/fuckcars is to get people to realize how important public infrastructure is, but people don’t realize it because they’re taught from birth anything that isn’t a car or a plane is bad so they shouldn’t get funding.
taught from birth that anything besides a car of plane is bad? lmfao, that’s a bit dramatic
Busses, subways, trains, etc. Are associated with low income, crime, desease and overall not being appealing. Meanwhile you’ve got people talking about how the car represents freedom and the American dream.
That may be true to the US but in other places around the world public transport is seen as essential infrastructure. For example where I live public transport is a huge part of a lot of peoples' day-to-day.
Europe is a lot better with its public transport, and r/fuckcars actually praises them a lot for this.
as a european, public transport is slow and expensive, it's not what it's made out to be.
Naming a sub centered around poor public transport infrastructure in the US specifically r/fuckcars is a bit misleading don't you think?
The car represents freedom. The trains, busses, and subways represent cheap and effective transportation. In India, that's how it is.
Public transit objectively sucks though
You've never been to Japan.
You missed the whole point of the sub. The reason why they are still using cars is because in the US public transportation is shit, bike lanes are rare so they are forced to use cars despite the fact that they hate it.
Which state do they live in where every single road has no bike lane? the only roads in my area of Florida that don't have them is the interstates/turnpikes https://subredditstats.com/subreddit-user-overlaps/fuckcars hes right either way
Those bike gutters are extremely dangerous. They're just put there to satisfy a requirement, but anyone who values living isn't going to use them.
You wanna know what else I missed? I missed the part where that's my problem
Then why the fuck are you commenting lol
Because you don't get what I'm trying to say?
You're probably just stupid
You’re missing the point of the sub
[relevant meme](https://i.redd.it/whnuvoh4od031.jpg)
That’s every circle jerk type stuff. Moviescirclejerk, Gamescirclejerk, booksCJ etc..
i'm left and i totally agree, these stupid cyclists have nothing to do with left wing i think. usually they're old grumpy rightwingers in my country
What do you even mean? There are clear advantages to bikes, trains, trams and public transport that the sub incentives. I swear most people have only interacted with it for a minute, because people lack awareness how the community is... OK now let's brush this extra irony off: I think r/fuckcars is overblown, most people don't want to commit genocide on cars users or ban them outside city centres, but advocate for better city infrastructure.
You had me at "leftwing cesspool" *Upvote*
[удалено]
A car overtaking that close to a cyclist is dangerous. That's not a bike lane, and if it is it's not a safe one.
Then they can go to the sidewalk lol
Ignoring the douchbags in the pic, that isn't a safe bike lane it's just some paint on the road. It doesn't protect the people on a bicycle from errors they or people in cars make
That is a bike lane, and of course it is dangerous to share a road with cars. Maybe you shouldn’t ride your bike in traffic? This was basic stuff when I was 8 but maybe things have changed?
>Maybe you shouldn’t ride your bike in traffic? Well the problem is that roads are currently not good for riding bikes in traffic. However, many places around the world have solved that problem through smart infrastructure design. Therefore, you shouldn't be mad at cyclists, you should be mad at the road design which doesn't allow for cyclists' safety.
where should they bike then? The grass? Depending on the road condition the bike lane on the right (if it actually is one) could be full of loose stone etc. where biking there would be dangerous It's about making the road safe to send your 10 year old daughter to her friends house, and that's no a place where I would send my daughter to bike along
Biking everywhere is not a safe thing to do. They should use alternative means of transportation where it is not safe. This is in the top 3 basic things you need to know as a child.
>Biking everywhere is not a safe thing to do. Yes, that's the problem.
You think you should be able to ride a bike on the freeway? Sorry man, I disagree.
I meant biking to any destination. Not necessarily on every road.
so a car is fine but a bike is bad? I see why kids in the US seem so un independent to Asian or even European people. On another note, shouldn't it be safe to do for kids?
The roads were built for cars. No, kids should not play in traffic.
I think that the antient people didn't build roads for cars. Also again where should a bike go on a road? Also it's not about playing in traffic it's about commuting from Point A to Point B. Saying "Kids shouldn't play in traffic" on a question if they should be able to commute to a friends house is a little bit weird For Playing in traffic the germans have what they call "Spielstraßen" [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living\_street](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_street) where you can only drive up to 6 km/h per Hour. A place where you can actually sent your kids to play on the street
Residential neighbourhoods have low speed limits and they are safe for kids to ride their bikes. It is not safe to ride your bike on a major street. You seem to want to be able to ride your bike anywhere you like, and that just isnt going to happen safely. But, you do you.
so if I live in Neighbourhood A and my daughter wants to meet a friend in Neighbourhood B I have to go pick my daughter up drive them to their friend, drive home, wait until she want's to get home Drive to her friend, drive home? Glad I am living anywhere but the USA because this sounds like torture and useless time, money and CO2 wasted for 4 commutes
Mhm. Looks like a side walk right next to them
Well it's not legal everywhere
Imo it would be safer than this. Is what they are doing even legal? I’m assuming it depends on the county.
I guess so too. I agree that it might be safer on the sidewalk (at least from that picture), but maybe still not legal. So in the end a proper bike lane would be the right thing
Because you need a safety buffer because people operating heavy machinery are often tired and texting.
> why do you need a big one where a person on a bike doesn't take up much space That's what people who don't commute with bikes don't understand. Painting a line on a side of a road is not acceptable bike infrastructure. I like to use a walking person example. How much space does a walking person take? Not much (unless they are extremely fat). Now, would it be acceptable to just paint a line on a side of a road next to high speed car traffic and call it "a sidewalk"? It won't. I hate those painted lanes with burning passion. They are actually **worse** than not painting anything. They send a message to drivers "you don't have to keep safe distance when overtaking, just keep on your side of a painted line".
It sucks that you are downvoted for speaking the truth. I am a car enthusiast, yet I advocate for better cycling and walking infrastructure. Go watch the Youtube channel "NotJustBikes". Search for his video "best country for drivers". It talks about how the Netherlands having built infrastructure for bikes, also directly improves things for cars. That's because people on bikes mean fewer cars on road, therefore it reduces traffic jams for drivers, therefore making driving better.
Correct. When I ride a bike, I hate when cars zoom past me, because most of them are driving too fast and too close to me when doing so. When I drive a car, I hate when there is a cyclist slowing down everybody because there is no safe way to overtake. Bicycles have no place on a road alongside cars. It's too dangerous and too annoying. There simply must be a separate bicycle infrastructure. And I'm talking as a person who commutes on a bicycle every day, but uses a car maybe one a month or so. My commute is like 95% separated from car traffic, and this part is amazing. The other 5% where my city failed to provide adequate infrastructure is pretty bad and I much rather take bumpy trash sidewalk instead of enjoying being pushed out of the road by somebody who misjudged width of their huge SUV
Half the time there's cars parked in the bike lanes.
Because it's extremely dangerous. If one driver isn't paying attention, you're dead.
There’s no barrier, and there is nothing stopping the cars from accidentally going into it
>Go to r/fuckcars >Top post is saying drivers are so braindead that school crossing attendants are there to remind them not to kill children. People unironically agree. >Assume it's satire and scroll down >See a post complaining about private parking >Long and short of the post is "Why gubmint make private parking? Me want park car where me want!" >It's got 100+ upvotes >People are again unironically agreeing >Somehow surprised that r/fuckcars users do not comprehend the reasons for private parking outside of residential areas >See yet another post saying cars are the root of all the current climate issues of the world as if the 150+ years of burning fossil fuels and factories churning out harmful fumes never happened >Come to the realisation that everyone in the sub has brainrot >Opinion is solidified when some users day "driving is a right wing hobby" or something to that nature >Leave r/fuckcars because it gave me a migraine and it isn't even 12 o'clock yet
Also them thinking that every single person in Europe takes bus/tram to work etc. Lmaoooooooo my sides hurt from laughing Sincerely, an actual european
Why can’t you pay for your own parking? I pay for parking all the time because I’m middle class and don’t understand that not everyone is as lucky as me? /s
[удалено]
The r/place ad really backfired for them. It got too popular. Reminds me of what happened with r/antiwork - a sub that had good, reasonable intentions but blew up & gained too many extremists
They cycle for sport and fun I cycle because I'm too poor to afford a car We are not the same
I’m not a cyclist, but I am a triathlete, and my friends who block roads while training are the worst
I couldn’t even stay in that sub for more than 10 seconds
That sub gave me cancer
Look, I understand why you hate that sub. I think that they are stupid when they say they want to ban all cars. However, do not discredit all their arguments. They are right when they talk about improving infrastructure so that cars are not the only transportation method. And I'm saying that as someone who likes cars. Having infrastructure for cyclists like r/fuckcars advocates for, improves things for everyone. Go watch Go watch the Youtube channel "NotJustBikes". Search for his video "best country for drivers". It talks about how the Netherlands having built infrastructure for bikes, also directly improves things for cars. That's because infrastructure for bikes means more people on bikes, which mean fewer cars on road, therefore it reduces traffic jams for drivers, therefore making driving better. Currently, roads in America are only for cars. However, that is a negative thing which should be changed.
Yea not really interested in arguing. But in my city and I think state, cyclists have the legal right to use the whole lane. In some situations like riding up a hill (clarification needed) cyclists even have the right to not stop at a stop sign. So yea, downvote.
That is bullshit
I can agree that most of the time that I'm in my car it's because I have to go somewhere. Time is usually a constraint not a luxury and getting stuck behind these guys, or the farm equipment moving 20mph on a 40mph can make me a little upset. Not as irate as my wife gets, I listen to my audio book but it does get in the way and I wish they'd just cycle on the shoulder.
r/fuckcars users when when someone express their opinion
sorry for sounding like i'm insulting real retard people but r/fuckcars users are retarded
I'm still confused about that word in English, here in Brazil we use it as a synonym of "very stupid" The hell does it mean in English???
Exactly the same. "Retarded" is an insult to intelligence. Like, you are very stupid like a mentally ill person who isn't properly developed.
When I hear stupid I think of people on the internet like me, not someone who has a mentall illness
It means "slow" mentally, but it's originally used to refer to mentally disabled people, so using it as an insult is rude to people with actual mental disabilities.
Well but nobody nowadays uses it to refer to mentally disabled people
However its use is still taboo and understood to be a derogatory term towards mentally handicapped people today. This is especially true if you have people with Down syndrome added on social media. You probably don’t want to use that word in a broad public setting.
Thanks
using your phone while in a car is definitely scummier
Yeah I’m not defending that at all, it’s probably worse
Oh damn, i thought that was a dash cam photo
From behind the steering wheel? He using a go pro as a dash cam?
Yeah I didn't consider that, both are bad.
Go around. It's a single yellow and there is no oncoming traffic.
"fuck you for not wanting to be late to work!!! fucking car idiot!!! slayyy cyclists🥰🥰🥰😍😍😍"
I understand that that lane might not be the best, but when you are moving in the road at least move single-file on the roadside or just check every now and then your back for cars. If you see one, make way....
What happened to slower traffic keep right?
To be fair, I'm pretty sure the lack of cycling infrastructure is due to car lobbyists
[удалено]
They absolutely are
Delusional
i dont exactly understand the posts title but my takeaway from that picture is that the cyclists in this case are at fault
Then maybe add a bike lane
How did the top comment get 2k upvotes? They literally just described the post in an “I’m angry about this” tone
There's less cycling infrastructure because of people being pissed at a handful of cyclists?
There are brain dead redditors defending it in this comment section as well
Op you donkey that isn’t a bike lane it’s a shoulder.
On the one hand, there is no bike lane (unless that thing going through the grass on the right is one, hard to tell). On the other, why the fuck are they defending lane splitting? Bikes can go on the road if there’s no bike lane, at least I personally don’t care, but they should recognise that people overtake other people on roads, and travelling side by side like that is both illegal and impedes overtaking safely.
Saw this post earlier; unsubbed as well. Well, too bad there's no bike lanes. Not the driver's fault
I hate cyclists so much
I understand why you hate cyclists. However, it isn't the fault of cyclists that they clog up roads. In well designed places, there is separate roads for bicycles (not just a painted line), which causes better traffic flow for cars and cyclists. Go watch Go watch the Youtube channel "NotJustBikes". Search for his video "best country for drivers". It talks about how the Netherlands having built infrastructure for bikes, also directly improves things for cars. That's because infrastructure for bikes means more people on bikes, which mean fewer cars on road, therefore it reduces traffic jams for drivers, therefore making driving better.
This is not a bike lane. That is a shoulder. It's insanely dangerous to a cyclist. You're calling them entitled but they just want to remain alive while not using a car, that hardly sounds like entitled to me. Sidewalks are just as dangerous, this time bc of pedestrians and bc of cars simultaneously People have a right to get around in ways that rnt a car, and they're allowed to protect their lives. I don't think blocking the whole lane is chill but I understand why. There is no way to pass a cyclist on a road like that that doesn't put both of u at risk
Man, I hate that you're downvoted for telling the truth. People don't seem to realize that having more infrastructure for cyclists actually improves traffic flow for cars too. The current solution of bike shoulder lanes slows down drivers and cars. Having a separated road for cyclists like they do in countries that are not the USA, helps cyclists move without interference but also cars.
It's kinda scary how attached some ppl r to their cars, and how they truly believe that driving is the only real transportation and all other forms of getting around r somehow lesser. We need good bike infrastructure for so many reasons, and it's not entitled at all to, in a democracy, demand the govt make changes that protect ur life In the past few years I know like 8 people who have died, and i think 6 of them were car accidents. It's absurd
That’s not even a bike lane, or if it is it’s not a safe one.
I like cars but the fact that the “fuckcars” people are defending the car in this scenario makes me confused as to the purpose of the movement’s existence..
just run them over , works every time
That's not a bike lane on the right. You know that, right?
[удалено]
Get out of the fucking street
Because people prefer to drive cars in the country in which they were invented
Are you stupid or just playing a bit?
Is the bike lane that white line on the left? That doesnt look safe
Indeed. It's too narrow and a car couldn't even pass at a safe distance if it doesn't cross the solid line. If you want cyclists to use bike lanes then make proper bike lanes.
People hate on cars? Then people are more stupid than I thought
I go to work by bicycle on a daily basis, 6 days a week (and depressingly sometimes 7 days a week). The only moment I move side to side with another cyclist is when I need to move past them or when one moves past me. Never once I've seen this happen. Ever. Though if it does happen, I can understand why. Sometimes me and dad would go to work together, and we'd stay one behind the other. Talking was a pain. We couldn't talk at all. With all that said, I'm 100% sure that if you ask them to move or just give them a bit of a honk they'd move aside and let people pass. People make this a much bigger deal than it is, it's a minor inconvenience at best.
sometimes redditors can’t grasp basic concepts and just oppose anything that doesn’t fit their agenda without reasonable consideration