this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2025
422 points (97.7% liked)

Fuck Cars

10886 readers
51 users here now

This community exists as a sister community/copycat community to the r/fuckcars subreddit.

This community exists for the following reasons:

You can find the Matrix chat room for this community here.

Rules

  1. Be nice to each other. Being aggressive or inflammatory towards other users will get you banned. Name calling or obvious trolling falls under that. Hate cars, hate the system, but not people. While some drivers definitely deserve some hate, most of them didn't choose car-centric life out of free will.

  2. No bigotry or hate. Racism, transphobia, misogyny, ableism, homophobia, chauvinism, fat-shaming, body-shaming, stigmatization of people experiencing homeless or substance users, etc. are not tolerated. Don't use slurs. You can laugh at someone's fragile masculinity without associating it with their body. The correlation between car-culture and body weight is not an excuse for fat-shaming.

  3. Stay on-topic. Submissions should be on-topic to the externalities of car culture in urban development and communities globally. Posting about alternatives to cars and car culture is fine. Don't post literal car fucking.

  4. No traffic violence. Do not post depictions of traffic violence. NSFW or NSFL posts are not allowed. Gawking at crashes is not allowed. Be respectful to people who are a victim of traffic violence or otherwise traumatized by it. News articles about crashes and statistics about traffic violence are allowed. Glorifying traffic violence will get you banned.

  5. No reposts. Before sharing, check if your post isn't a repost. Reposts that add something new are fine. Reposts that are sharing content from somewhere else are fine too.

  6. No misinformation. Masks and vaccines save lives during a pandemic, climate change is real and anthropogenic - and denial of these and other established facts will get you banned. False or highly speculative titles will get your post deleted.

  7. No harassment. Posts that (may) cause harassment, dogpiling or brigading, intentionally or not, will be removed. Please do not post screenshots containing uncensored usernames. Actual harassment, dogpiling or brigading is a bannable offence.

Please report posts and comments that violate our rules.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Not the first time this has happened either, here's another similar case in Atlanta: https://abcnews.go.com/US/mother-boy-killed-hit-run-driver-probation-community/story?id=14158040

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

Have you been to an American school recently? The elementary next to my house could be confused for a prison at first glance. It hasn't gotten bad, if anything it's actually safer than when we went to school. They have promoted a society of individuals ruled by fear.

[–] Zenith@lemm.ee 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Our most recent school levy addressed basically nothing but turning the schools into jails by wanting to hire a bunch of cops, install metal detectors and a bunch of other “security measures” and this is a rural small district, we have zero need for that stuff, why not propose paying teachers better, buying updated textbooks or funding after school care, something but I’m not and never will vote to turn our schools into prisons

[–] Crankenstein@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

There is a pervasive ideal in this country that has been a core part of it since the Pilgrims landed: Puritanical Ethics of "punishment is Divine, to suffer is to be Holy"

Something is wrong? Punish the wrongness until it becomes righteous. If it doesn't work then punish harder.

It's how this country has always solved its problems. Label the other as wicked then beat them into submission.

[–] mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

if anything it's actually safer than when we went to school

Gun violence is the #1 cause of child mortality in the US.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

In the home, mostly, yep. Outside the home is statistically safer now than almost any other time. Overall crime is down to historic lows.

Ironically, at this point, and for the last 30 years in the US, owning a gun makes you more susceptible to gun violence. That may be changing, but I seriously doubt it since the cops are now public enemy #1, and have been since the mid '90s.

Oh and before you try to defend the thugs with badges, they were declaring war on the public all throughout the '80s and '90s, by using yellow journalism and Hollywood to manufacture a "war on cops," because people were rightfully questioning qualified immunity. It didn't exist until Harlow V Fitzgerald in 1982. It shouldn't exist at all according to the law as written and recorded in The Congressional Record.

US cops have always been nothing more than glorified slave hunters. It seems that nothing changes in that criminal organization. The DOJ is still reporting that cops commit far more crime than all of the arraigned, but not convicted, potential criminals in the US.

[–] nanook@friendica.eskimo.com -5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

@AngryCommieKender In my time you didn't hear of school shootings. They just didn't happen. So there was less need for the draconian security. My high school was open campus, and my Jr high we were at least allowed to leave during lunch. Different world today entirely. And I don't like it because it conditions people for 15 minute cities and other forms of tyranny.

[–] ShrimpCurler@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

... it conditions people for 15 minute cities and other forms of tyranny

Are you saying you think the idea of having all important services within 15 minutes is tyranny?

[–] nanook@friendica.eskimo.com -5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

@ShrimpCurler I'm saying being restricted in your ability to travel is tyranny, and I KNOW you know this was my intent.

[–] ShrimpCurler@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I was confused because it's such a bad take... That's not what 15 minute cities are about. That's just the dumb conspiracy theories.

[–] nanook@friendica.eskimo.com -3 points 1 day ago

@ShrimpCurler Ok you're obvious part of the Klaus Schwab fan club, no thanks!

[–] aeischeid@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

your intent is NOT clear.

restricted in your ability to travel is totally normal and not tyranny. Drivers licences are smart, Pilot license make sense, dang are speed limits tyranny?

15 minutes cities is just a concept that all or most of the typically important services citizens need to survive and thrive should be within a 15 minutes of where they live without REQUIRING a car. Modern car dependent culture is the tyranny if anything, and 15 minute cities idea is a response to that

[–] nanook@friendica.eskimo.com -2 points 1 day ago (3 children)

@aeischeid For anyone capable of basic logic it would have been. Obviously having services readily available is not tyrannical, being unable to travel is, what other significant aspects of 15 minute cities are there? Do you really want your life controlled to this degree?

[–] PedestrianError@towns.gay 5 points 1 day ago

@nanook @aeischeid No one capable of basic logic thinks 15 minute cities have anything to do with restricting travel. Either you're being disingenuous, or you're sorely lacking in the logic you think you possess.

[–] sthetic@lemmy.ca 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Has anyone ever actually said, "I think we should have all services within a zone of 15-minute travel, and we should restrict people from leaving their zone, and this is called 15 Minute Cities and I support that idea"?

"Having services readily available" is the entire idea. "You're not allowed to go to another area" is nonsense that someone else tacked on to the concept to make people hate it.

[–] nanook@friendica.eskimo.com -1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

@sthetic But that's not what they are doing. In Oxford, they blocked off most of the streets between the cities sections with planters forcing you to go to an outer ring, after people threatened to hang the city council they reneg'd but if you aren't vigilant this is what they do.

[–] sthetic@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

I looked this up and found this information about it:

In its Local Plan 2040, Oxford City Council proposed installing elements from the 15-minute city urban concept in neighborhoods throughout the city over the next 20 years. These plans included proposals to improve accessibility to local shops and other amenities for residents so they didn’t have to always drive. Separately, Oxfordshire County Council announced traffic-reducing measures throughout the city, with infrastructure to encourage car travel around the city by using the ring road rather than already congested roads. Initial opposition to the plans led to proposals to introduce permit schemes to facilitate car travel at certain times, allowing car access to areas that the council planned to restrict to motorists.

First, the article says it was separate. Nobody said, "We are blocking everybody's access to this road because the goal of 15-Minute City is to restrict people and forbid them from leaving their zone."

Second, it was just traffic-calming. They put up some planters blocking roads to vehicles to encourage access by bike, pedestrians, etc. That's not restricting access, that is INCREASING access. By bikes.

They decided that a different, busier road was more appropriate for cars. How on earth does that equate to restricting access? So your car had to drive further, using a big busy road instead of a local quiet street - boo-hoo! This, to you, was a sign that the government wants to confine you to a 15 minute area and never let you leave?

Are the following measures, to you, a sign of nefarious "restricting access"?

  • An ambulance can drive the wrong way down the street, but you cannot
  • A bus can travel in a bus lane, but you cannot
  • A commercial vehicle can park in a loading zone, but you cannot
  • A vehicle with several people can travel in a special HOV lane, but you cannot if you are driving alone
  • A toll bridge reads your license plate to check if you paid a fee to access that route, and charges you a fine if you did not
  • The city takes out a vehicle lane to build a dedicated bike lane and plant some nice shrubs
  • The city closes a street temporarily for a neighbourhood block party
  • The city installs speed bumps on a quiet street
  • The city builds a traffic circle at a quiet intersection
  • The city puts up a sign limiting the speed you can travel
  • A highway cuts through an existing quiet suburb, meaning your car cannot cross it on a quiet street; you have to use an onramp and get on the busy highway

All of those technically "restrict access" by your seeming definition. Well, at least by vehicle. Is it your assertion that private vehicles reign supreme, and if the government does anything to slow down, discourage, or increase the cost of vehicle travel, it means their future goal is to create walled mini-cities that folks can't leave?

Edit: also, you say that people threatened to hang the city council to get them to renege - are you proud of this? Your "side" is threatening to murder people if they don't govern the way they want, and that's just "being vigilant"? To prevent planters from being placed on a street? What the hell?

[–] nanook@friendica.eskimo.com 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

@sthetic I don't live there but relayed info from someone who does. You can sit quietly while they build a cage around you, that is not what I choose to do.

[–] sthetic@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 minutes ago

I don't see it as a cage at all.

I know my comment was long, but you haven't answered:

  • Why you think that the same people who advocate for services within 15 minutes also advocate for confining people within a certain zone as part of that goal - have they ever said so? Why would they want to do so anyway? What do they get out of it?
  • Why you think that traffic calming is a slippery slope to confining vehicles, or all modes of transport, within a certain zone, instead of just trying to balance the ease of access between vehicles and bikes, scooters, skateboards, buses, pedestrians, etc.

If you want to believe in a conspiracy, why not look at the ways in which the auto industry has suppressed other modes of transport, from inventing the term "jaywalking" to suppressing electric trams to building giant highways through poor neighbourhoods?

[–] ebolapie@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I have literally never seen the idea of a 15 minute city being restrictive anywhere other than the ravings of Alex Jones tier wingnuts. Everybody who actually pushes the concept just thinks you should have a grocery store, a doctor's office, a library etc. near your house.

Edit: and don't get it twisted, nobody is saying you should be forced to relocate either, it's a guideline for urban planning.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Same. I vaguely remember some shooting happening my Jr. Year of HS. I wanna say Bowling Green or Paducah, KY. This was before Columbine. Columbine was my Freshman year at Transylvania University.