PedestrianError

@Cypher @Hawke So if you were to lose your vision or develop epilepsy tomorrow, you would prefer to be dependent on family, friends, or personal servants to drive you everywhere rather than having options of accessible trains and buses and being able to walk to nearby destinations safely?

@TheTechnician27 @Vittelius Why bother vandalizing something that’s just going to fall apart on its own within a few weeks or months?

@x00z @talzag Traffic engineers often consider themselves much more expert than they actually are on a lot of things and their traditional methods of setting speed limits are little more than astrology which all but ignore the needs of non-car road users, but if there’s one group less expert than traffic engineers on safe driving speed, it’s cops.

@NarrativeBear @lnxtx No, people have a right to use legally owned weapons in self-defense, so a driver has no right to drive recklessly and endanger random people and can only use their car as a weapon if their life is in imminent danger from someone else’s assault, such as a pedestrian standing in front of their car firing a gun at them.

@FireRetardant @LifeInMultipleChoice If you have to drive regularly you should also write to your local politicians that your needs are not being met safely because it’s too difficult for you to travel in ways that are safer and more efficient.

@huginn @vividspecter It’s not like the potential for another Trump administration wasn’t foreseeable. Hochul and her allies should have considered that and Pete Buttigieg and others at USDOT should have reminded them. Then again, when I started urban planning school in 2005, the potential for congestion pricing in New York was the talk of the town so it’s not like these centrist cowards are the first to delay it.

@beefbot @TheTechnician27 Firetrucks are inanimate objects. Humans make decisions about how to design, deploy, market, and accommodate them. A local fire chief just parroting industry dogma may be less responsible than someone with more power who chose not to sell reasonably sized fire trucks for suburbs and small towns in the US, but the trucks aren’t buying themselves or testifying against safe street designs at the planning board.

@SqueakyBeaver @ji17br Funny how such items enter chats a lot more frequently than they enter the bed of the typical suburban driver’s pickup truck.

@mozz I would just try to mix it up a bit: Kamala Harris, VP Harris, the vice president, etc. Compare it to however you refer to male/white politicians in everyday speech and just try to balance it. If you’re calling Biden Joe or referencing a conversation between Bernie and Kamala or whatever, no problem. What really shouldn’t happen intentionally or not is unequal parallels like “the VP debate between Kamala and Vance” or “Biden and Kamala need to articulate their message better.”

@mozz I’m not blaming you, I’m just saying that having a potential presidential nominee who is most frequently referred to by the public at large by a first name only is unusual and sets her apart from previous (male) nominees in ways which may unwittingly add to some voters’ already present feeling that perhaps she’s not really serious or experienced enough because she’s a woman.

@mozz I don’t think everyone intends for it to be sexist at all, it’s just that it takes places within a context in which female professors and medical doctors frequently report being on conference panels or introduced at meetings and have someone doing the introductions talk about, ‘Dr. This, Dr. That [both male], and Amy.’ It’s just one of many subtle ways women’s professional expertise and authority are quietly diminished.

@mozz Everybody needs to stop untitling the Vice President. It does not help move us toward a society that doesn’t discriminate in hiring for senior positions if we keep talking about women (especially if they’re women of color) as if they’re children while simultaneously referring to male peers by last names and/or titles.