• socsa@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    4 days ago

    Yes, this is precisely what I mean by “bad faith.” Even in the most terminally car brain culture there is effort made to separate pedestrian and automobile traffic, even if that means time interleaving on the same roadway. Very few places in the developed world allow pedestrians and automobiles to share the same roadway at the same time the way bicycles and pedestrians can.

    The simple and (I thought) self evident premise here is that cyclists and pedestrians can coexist in ways pedestrians and motor vehicles cannot. Blurring the line between a bicycle and a moped serves nobody besides those who seek to perpetuate the exact same legacy ideas which currently force pedestrians and motor vehicles into needless, dangerous conflict.

    • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      Even in the most terminally car brain culture there is effort made to separate pedestrian and automobile traffic

      What’s a “crosswalk” then?

        • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          That’s what a crosswalk is.

          Furthermore, for all modes of transport (even boats), crossing situations are where most crashes occur; overtaking crashes are relatively rare. The reason for not mixing vehicle and pedestrian traffic moving in the same direction (and the reason for creating sidewalks in the first place) is for speed and convenience of drivers, at the cost of pedestrian safety. Even in places where people walk in the street, crossings are where they most often get killed.

    • Hildegarde@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      It’s bad faith to claim that city streets are exclusively for cars. City streets have always been mixed use spaces historically.

      Cars are so dangerous they annexed the mixed use spaces they run in. Cars are a threat to everything around them. Bikes are forced into conflict with pedestrians as much as they are because of the amount space that has been seized by cars.

      Roads need to be rebuilt to eliminate or control cars to make them safe to those around them. Cars are the most dangerous thing on the roads, and should be treated as the threat that they are.

    • MummysLittleBloodSlut@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 days ago

      I’m upset because the government put a bunch of roads in between my house and the other places I like to go, so I have to be around cars in order to get places. I don’t think that’s fair.

      • socsa@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        Again, nothing is preventing you from having a moped, or riding a bicycle on the street. However, there are many other places in the world where there are trails and other infrastructure meant to be shared with pedestrians, which is why it is important that the distinction between bicycle and moped/motorcycle be understood.

    • vithigar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 days ago

      I can’t speak for elsewhere but in much of Canada the situation is opposite what you’re suggesting. Bicycles are legally considered vehicles and are expected to use the road with other traffic if no bicycle lanes or designated paths are available. It is illegal for them to share the sidewalk with pedestrians.

      This is, however, very rarely enforced.

      • Tonava@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Here’s a lot of places where pedestrians and cyclists share the same walkways, maybe it’s the same where the other commenter is from? It can definitely be a problem of infrastructure; even ones biking without electricity often go waaayyy too fast for it to be safe at all.

        I walk with my dog a lot and almost every day there’s a situation where some crazy cyclists flies past us like 30km/h and doesn’t even ring the bell. If I had a more reactive dog it would be a nightmare, a lot of of dogs are triggered to chase if something “runs” past like that, even if they’re super friendly and wouldn’t actually do anything if they caught the “prey”. I don’t understand how the cyclists don’t care for their own safety even if they clearly don’t care about others; if a bigger dog lunges at them (which is almost impossible to prevent with zero warning time, even if they dog was held by the collar) they’re the ones that could fly to the asphalt from high and hard. I’m surprised more small children aren’t hit by bikes as well, since the cyclists don’t seem to slow down for them either.

        And yes cars are often a problem as well and the crosswalks can be horribly unsafe because of idiots driving, but at least here the cyclists too are causing constant danger to pedestrians - because of the bad desing. Even without ebikes bike lanes are a must just as roads for cars are

    • Corn@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Mixing pedestrians, bicycles, and motorbikes on the same path is fine though, motorbikes can go around pedestrians in a way cars can’t.