Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Entirely unashamed anti car propaganda, and the more the better.

kabbes said:
I genuinely can’t empathise in any way with the mentality of someone that parks a car on the pavement like that, gets out and thinks “yeah, that’s fine”. It’s OBVIOUSLY not fine. The level of self-entitlement is so off the scale.
Click to expand...
You should try cycling for a week or two or casually mention to someone you're a cyclist and see the reaction.
 
kabbes said:
I genuinely can’t empathise in any way with the mentality of someone that parks a car on the pavement like that, gets out and thinks “yeah, that’s fine”. It’s OBVIOUSLY not fine. The level of self-entitlement is so off the scale.
Click to expand...

I expect there is some proportion of pavement parkers who are quite aware that their actions will obstruct wheelchair users, pushchair users and pedestrians in general - and simply don't care.

But there must also be some who this just hasn't occurred to. In their mind they are reducing the extent to which their car obstructs the roadway, and they just haven't thought much about the consequences of obstructing the pavement ... especially if it seems to them like they've left room for pedestrians to edge past.

That must be a product of the amount of time you spend navigating urban areas in your car rather than on foot. Those who drive habitually will be used to arriving somewhere, parking their car as close to the destination as possible and walking the very small remaining distance. They might seldom walk on the bits of pavement where pavement parking happens most. Even if their neighbour two doors down parks on the pavement, it might be that they hardly ever walk on that bit of pavement because 99% of the time they go anywhere, they leave in their car. If it's a problem you rarely encounter yourself (being obstructed as a pedestrian) then naturally it's likely that it's not going to figure that highly in your assessment of whether what you're doing is problematic.
 
teuchter said:
I expect there is some proportion of pavement parkers who are quite aware that their actions will obstruct wheelchair users, pushchair users and pedestrians in general - and simply don't care.

But there must also be some who this just hasn't occurred to. In their mind they are reducing the extent to which their car obstructs the roadway, and they just haven't thought much about the consequences of obstructing the pavement ... especially if it seems to them like they've left room for pedestrians to edge past.

That must be a product of the amount of time you spend navigating urban areas in your car rather than on foot. Those who drive habitually will be used to arriving somewhere, parking their car as close to the destination as possible and walking the very small remaining distance. They might seldom walk on the bits of pavement where pavement parking happens most. Even if their neighbour two doors down parks on the pavement, it might be that they hardly ever walk on that bit of pavement because 99% of the time they go anywhere, they leave in their car. If it's a problem you rarely encounter yourself (being obstructed as a pedestrian) then naturally it's likely that it's not going to figure that highly in your assessment of whether what you're doing is problematic.
Click to expand...
Suspect its car drivers that don’t actually walk anywhere - which seems to make up a fair proportion.
 
Bloke in my road has a huge SUV which he parks on his driveway, the vehicle overhangs about half the pavement. As it happens the road is the end of a cul de sac, so not much traffic but it definitely annoys me
 
teuchter said:
I expect there is some proportion of pavement parkers who are quite aware that their actions will obstruct wheelchair users, pushchair users and pedestrians in general - and simply don't care.

But there must also be some who this just hasn't occurred to. In their mind they are reducing the extent to which their car obstructs the roadway, and they just haven't thought much about the consequences of obstructing the pavement ... especially if it seems to them like they've left room for pedestrians to edge past.

That must be a product of the amount of time you spend navigating urban areas in your car rather than on foot. Those who drive habitually will be used to arriving somewhere, parking their car as close to the destination as possible and walking the very small remaining distance. They might seldom walk on the bits of pavement where pavement parking happens most. Even if their neighbour two doors down parks on the pavement, it might be that they hardly ever walk on that bit of pavement because 99% of the time they go anywhere, they leave in their car. If it's a problem you rarely encounter yourself (being obstructed as a pedestrian) then naturally it's likely that it's not going to figure that highly in your assessment of whether what you're doing is problematic.
Click to expand...
Maybe. I don’t really know any car drivers who don’t also walk a lot, but then I live somewhere where people do a lot of walking for leisure, and take the train a lot to get into London
 


From about 5.45 onwards this addresses, quite well, the freedom/choice argument, the one that is commonly made, including many times over on this thread, that the private car brings freedom.
 
Last edited:
The batshit "Life in the UK" citizenship test continues to be batshit.

Although in this instance I guess certain people on this thread will be happy to gloss over their previous criticism of it on account of the particular batshitedness of this specific question:

 
I genuinely don’t know how whatever is viewed as the “correct” answer to that question is framed, justified and evidenced.
 
kabbes said:
I genuinely don’t know how whatever is viewed as the “correct” answer to that question is framed, justified and evidenced.
Click to expand...

Well I was sufficiently interested to go a little way down that rabbit hole and take some of the example tests (which include that question). It’s basically (for that at least, see below) a reading comprehension. There’s a booklet called ‘Life in the uk’, which includes this:

IMG_5121.jpeg

So, by a process of elimination from that first list, the correct answer is ‘driving a car’ (the fourth option in the question is ‘treat others with fairness’).

However one of the questions is ‘which 2 British actors have recently won Oscars?’ (The answers being tilda Swinton and Colin firth) which as far as I can see is not in the booklet, so…

My favourite completely irrelevant to life in Britain today question was ‘when was bronze invented?’ (4000 years ago is the answer they want).
 
platinumsage said:
The batshit "Life in the UK" citizenship test continues to be batshit.

Although in this instance I guess certain people on this thread will be happy to gloss over their previous criticism of it on account of the particular batshitedness of this specific question:

Click to expand...

Literally no idea what you’re on about as usual but thanks for bumping the thread!
 
prunus said:
Well I was sufficiently interested to go a little way down that rabbit hole and take some of the example tests (which include that question). It’s basically (for that at least, see below) a reading comprehension. There’s a booklet called ‘Life in the uk’, which includes this:

View attachment 389592

So, by a process of elimination from that first list, the correct answer is ‘driving a car’ (the fourth option in the question is ‘treat others with fairness’).

However one of the questions is ‘which 2 British actors have recently won Oscars?’ (The answers being tilda Swinton and Colin firth) which as far as I can see is not in the booklet, so…

My favourite completely irrelevant to life in Britain today question was ‘when was bronze invented?’ (4000 years ago is the answer they want).
Click to expand...
Yay!! We invented bronze!!
 
prunus said:
Well I was sufficiently interested to go a little way down that rabbit hole and take some of the example tests (which include that question). It’s basically (for that at least, see below) a reading comprehension. There’s a booklet called ‘Life in the uk’, which includes this:

View attachment 389592

So, by a process of elimination from that first list, the correct answer is ‘driving a car’ (the fourth option in the question is ‘treat others with fairness’).

However one of the questions is ‘which 2 British actors have recently won Oscars?’ (The answers being tilda Swinton and Colin firth) which as far as I can see is not in the booklet, so…

My favourite completely irrelevant to life in Britain today question was ‘when was bronze invented?’ (4000 years ago is the answer they want).
Click to expand...
It amuses me that in the screenshot that you’ve copied and pasted, they misspelt “Following”.
 
kabbes said:
It amuses me that in the screenshot that you’ve copied and pasted, they misspelt “Following”.
Click to expand...

:D Didn't notice that!

I was slightly irritated that the first bullet point in the first bullet point list shouldn't really have been part of the list, but rather a lead-in fragment.
 
I'm never going to get a film question right. I'm not even certain I know the name Tilda Swinton., definitely wouldn't know she was an actor, let alone Oscar winner. Even, say, given a clue "One is named after a rice manufacturer" I wouldn't have got it.
 
prunus said:
Well I was sufficiently interested to go a little way down that rabbit hole and take some of the example tests (which include that question). It’s basically (for that at least, see below) a reading comprehension. There’s a booklet called ‘Life in the uk’, which includes this:

View attachment 389592

So, by a process of elimination from that first list, the correct answer is ‘driving a car’ (the fourth option in the question is ‘treat others with fairness’).

However one of the questions is ‘which 2 British actors have recently won Oscars?’ (The answers being tilda Swinton and Colin firth) which as far as I can see is not in the booklet, so…

My favourite completely irrelevant to life in Britain today question was ‘when was bronze invented?’ (4000 years ago is the answer they want).
Click to expand...

Someone who has read Chapter 1 would know that the fundamental principles are "democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, tolerance of those with different faiths and beliefs, and participation in community life".

"Looking after the environment" is not a fundamental principle, but is merely one of the things that a citizen "should" do, as are "looking after yourself and family" and "treating others with fairness". Consequently it is not possible to answer this question correctly.
 
platinumsage said:
Someone who has read Chapter 1 would know that the fundamental principles are "democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, tolerance of those with different faiths and beliefs, and participation in community life".

"Looking after the environment" is not a fundamental principle, but is merely one of the things that a citizen "should" do, as are "looking after yourself and family" and "treating others with fairness". Consequently it is not possible to answer this question correctly.
Click to expand...

Well just shows how poor my reading comprehension is then!
 
beesonthewhatnow said:
Yeah, but we can’t have that here because farmers might need big SUV’s to deliver a fridge to their disabled grandma on the school run.
Click to expand...

We can't have it because we're incapable of building infrastructure in this country. They're supposed to be doing it where I am in Cambridge but the quango tasked with it is shit, so what is supposed to be an express dedicated off-road cycle network ends up with nonsense like this:

'the scheme’s proposal to “make a barely 1.5m pavement in Swaffham Bulbeck right next to the busy main road with poor sightlines due to a hedge and bends into a shared walking/cycling/horse rider route”'

So we manage to have nimby residents, drivers and cyclists all united against it:

road.cc

New cycle paths “like putting a motorway down the high street”, say residents

The Cambridge-based cycling group Camcycle has also argued that the proposed greenways represent a missed opportunity for “game-changing” active travel improvements
road.cc road.cc
 
road.cc

Near Miss of the Day 806: Driver escapes punishment after reversing at cyclist and running over dog

Update: North Yorkshire Police concluded that the motorist “probably just wanted to speak” to the cyclist following the close pass, and advised the cyclist “not to shout in future”
road.cc road.cc


Near Miss of the Day 806: Driver escapes punishment after reversing at cyclist and running over dog​


Update: North Yorkshire Police concluded that the motorist “probably just wanted to speak” to the cyclist following the close pass, and advised the cyclist “not to shout in future”
Click to expand...


Actually speechless over this right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Yossarian
Entirely unashamed ant car propaganda
Replies
7
Views
404
dessiato
dessiato
ska invita
Car diagnostic computer scanners
Replies
8
Views
271
mauvais
mauvais
kebabking
Car buying websites?
2
Replies
38
Views
938
colacubes
colacubes
danny la rouge
Car insurance rocketing
2 3 4
Replies
108
Views
3K
planetgeli
P
story
Has anyone tried Turo.com for renting a car?
Replies
3
Views
178
Winot
Winot
Back
Top Bottom