Just to be clear, I do think the obvious solution to terrible things like this is vastly expanded public transit so that people don’t have to rely on cars to get everywhere, not overhyped technology and driving aids that are still only marginally better than a human driver. I just thought the article was interesting.
More trains, trams, bicycle and/or e-scooter rentals, walking (a mile is what, 20 minutes walk at most?)
Trains?! For last mile?!
Trams, sure, smaller buses that run more often too. More routes.
Bicycles et al so long as they pay insurance, have a plate and know the traffic rules like everyone else - and preferably put them in their own lanes when possible.
Walking… if you have time and physical ability, but who cares about that, right? It’s so cool and eco-friendly to say “just walk 20 minutes”.
Still trains.
If cities are designed better, trains get more effective. Do mixed zoning and put housing on top of shopping, and the last mile plan problem is largely solved. For the rest, bicycles and buses work well.
And walking can be way better with moving walkways. They’re popular at airports, and I’d love to see them more in malls and maybe underground/covered sidewalks.
The most important thing is to commit and make driving more annoying so solutions to the last mile problem can be created. Otherwise you’ll just end up with gridlock.
Subways makes more sense.
Somewhat common where I live, not common enough though.
Also trains. If it runs on rails, it’s a train.
Bicycle insurance and plates? Why? That makes zero sense. We have these for cars because cars are dangerous, not just for funsies. Bicycles don’t pose the same danger.
Yeah it is cool and eco-friendly to walk 20 minutes (assuming one is able-bodied, as you mention.)
Bicycles do pose similar dangers. A cyclists running a red light it the typical example. Forces someone else to swerve and hit a post then what?
Cyclists on the whole break traffic laws a lot less than motorists.
Also, I love how your only example of “the dangers of cyclists” involves someone in a car having to react to a cyclist. If everyone is cycling, speeds are low enough to react and typically avoid collisions even if a potential conflict arises. The “forces someone to swerve” phenomenon mostly happens at the speed of motor vehicles.
so you want to ruin childhood by placing pointless restrictions on bikes?
Riiight, childhood’s defined by riding bicycles and not doing so would ruin it… uh-huh. Kids can ride them.all they want in parks and bike lanes, but you want them on the street alongside those dangerous cars? They might have a serious accident… now that would ruin their childhood.
Grownups can ride on roads (if there’s no bike lane available) provided the vehicle has a plate and is insured, like any other vehicle. The driver should have the basics of road safety and rules, as any other driver.
Your think of the children take is kinda lame, especially considering most kids these days care more about game consoles that bicycles (which is bad imho).