All of these comments seem crazy to me. Getting mad you’re allowed to go over 20mph? You want to pay rip off fines? I can understand that more parking has the potential to make roads unwalkable and unsafe, I’ve seen the videos about stroads, I totally agree. But the other points seem positive. Are people mad he’s focusing on cars while doing nothing for other bicycling and walkability? Because if this was part of a larger transportation project I think it would be positive, except for the parking issue.
They’re all encouraging more driving, which leads to more pollution and more pedestrian deaths. 20mph speed limits reduce collisions, reduce the severity when they do happen, decrease pollution, and barely has an effect on journey times.
The 20mph part is most infuriating. Obviously not paying ‘rip-off fines’ sounds great but I honestly don’t even know what he’s talking about. But 20mph is great, and from a driving experience perspective the difference to 30 is so arbitrary. How changing that back is letting drivers ‘live their lives’ I have no clue. What if I want to go at 35mph, Rishi?
I thought 20mph speed limits just resulted in cars speeding more and going significantly faster than they would otherwise. Drivers don’t really care about speed limits, they go as fast as they feel comfortable. Therefore we should make drivers as uncomfortable as possible.
I like the sausage and egg mcmuffins, they are 2 for $5 before 10:30am edit: IDK why there’s a problem setting safe speeds around schools. I support public safety efforts
I’m a pedestrian. A car going over 20 mph isn’t getting me to my destination any faster, it’s putting my life at risk to get its driver somewhere faster.
All this supposed government overreach that is being railed against was instituted by the tories. Even if these were sincere, genuine, and good proposals the framing is both dishonest and hypocritical.
Further, low traffic neighborhoods are good actually. It’s GOOD that people can walk to places without getting hit by cars.
Bus lanes should not be occupied by normal cars, because then it’s not a fucking bus lane.
Fining local councils for street work taking a long time doesn’t actually make any fucking sense.
sometimes, even on roads, you’ll find these un-vehicled, squishy beings who are not protected by 4000 pounds of steel. and when these small beings are hit by a large motor vehicle, they can get very hurt. the faster the vehicle is going, the more hurt they get. speed = ouchie. when a car going 20mphs hits them, they can get hurt and scared, but usually, they’ll be okay. but if the car is going very fast when it hits them, they can get a boo boo so bad that it can’t be fixed even by a doctor :(
How are you going to transport material goods without cars and trucks? How will doctors get to patients? I hope you pledge to never own or rent a car, and you never ride in someone else’s car because you think they should be illegal. Next time you are in someone’s car tell them you think they should be arrested for driving a car.
Yes cargo bikes are really cool and should gain popularity but this suggestion makes me realize that the people commenting here are not qualified and not capable of understanding infrastructure needs. Materials can weigh hundreds and thousands of pounds and need to be transported long distances. People’s lives depend on the ability to have food, shelter, and medical care. An army of cargo bikes won’t provide the bandwidth required to maintain society. People advocating against road vehicles should feel free to choice their opinion. But this discussion of prohibiting vehicles is not based in reality and could not realistically be considered.
All of these comments seem crazy to me. Getting mad you’re allowed to go over 20mph? You want to pay rip off fines? I can understand that more parking has the potential to make roads unwalkable and unsafe, I’ve seen the videos about stroads, I totally agree. But the other points seem positive. Are people mad he’s focusing on cars while doing nothing for other bicycling and walkability? Because if this was part of a larger transportation project I think it would be positive, except for the parking issue.
They’re all encouraging more driving, which leads to more pollution and more pedestrian deaths. 20mph speed limits reduce collisions, reduce the severity when they do happen, decrease pollution, and barely has an effect on journey times.
The 20mph part is most infuriating. Obviously not paying ‘rip-off fines’ sounds great but I honestly don’t even know what he’s talking about. But 20mph is great, and from a driving experience perspective the difference to 30 is so arbitrary. How changing that back is letting drivers ‘live their lives’ I have no clue. What if I want to go at 35mph, Rishi?
I thought 20mph speed limits just resulted in cars speeding more and going significantly faster than they would otherwise. Drivers don’t really care about speed limits, they go as fast as they feel comfortable. Therefore we should make drivers as uncomfortable as possible.
From the data I’ve seen, there is an increase in non-compliance, but also a reduction in average speeds.
20mph zones are generally around schools or heavily pedestrianised areas. Children are going to die as a result of blanket removal of 20mph zones.
the person you’re responding to doesn’t care so long as it means they get to mcdonald’s five seconds faster
They could do just that with proper bike lanes and regulations letting the streets not be congested
But yeah they probably don’t care
I like the sausage and egg mcmuffins, they are 2 for $5 before 10:30am edit: IDK why there’s a problem setting safe speeds around schools. I support public safety efforts
enjoy your heart attack i guess
I’m a pedestrian. A car going over 20 mph isn’t getting me to my destination any faster, it’s putting my life at risk to get its driver somewhere faster.
All this supposed government overreach that is being railed against was instituted by the tories. Even if these were sincere, genuine, and good proposals the framing is both dishonest and hypocritical.
Further, low traffic neighborhoods are good actually. It’s GOOD that people can walk to places without getting hit by cars.
Bus lanes should not be occupied by normal cars, because then it’s not a fucking bus lane.
Fining local councils for street work taking a long time doesn’t actually make any fucking sense.
sometimes, even on roads, you’ll find these un-vehicled, squishy beings who are not protected by 4000 pounds of steel. and when these small beings are hit by a large motor vehicle, they can get very hurt. the faster the vehicle is going, the more hurt they get. speed = ouchie. when a car going 20mphs hits them, they can get hurt and scared, but usually, they’ll be okay. but if the car is going very fast when it hits them, they can get a boo boo so bad that it can’t be fixed even by a doctor :(
yes. if i had my way driving would be illegal except in very special circumstances. cars are a plague on humanity and the earth
Death to America
How are you going to transport material goods without cars and trucks? How will doctors get to patients? I hope you pledge to never own or rent a car, and you never ride in someone else’s car because you think they should be illegal. Next time you are in someone’s car tell them you think they should be arrested for driving a car.
Yes cargo bikes are really cool and should gain popularity but this suggestion makes me realize that the people commenting here are not qualified and not capable of understanding infrastructure needs. Materials can weigh hundreds and thousands of pounds and need to be transported long distances. People’s lives depend on the ability to have food, shelter, and medical care. An army of cargo bikes won’t provide the bandwidth required to maintain society. People advocating against road vehicles should feel free to choice their opinion. But this discussion of prohibiting vehicles is not based in reality and could not realistically be considered.
Banning LTNs - drive everywhere mfer. “Freeing” up bus lanes - effectively removing them… just horrible policy.