sleaterkinney
Well-Known Member
They do....
Entirely unashamed anti car propaganda, and the more the better.
- Thread starter teuchter
- Start date
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Actually I'd probably settle simply for men to be banned from driving, because they cause the most problems, driving twice as many miles per year, and causing a disproportionately high number of traffic incidents.
Saul Goodman
It's all good, man
Only the masculine ones, according to sleaterkinney
sleaterkinney
Well-Known Member
Think of how much space would be saved with even a reduction in car size.
8ball
Maximum Facepalm
Yes, simplistic group-based solutions are what is needed.
BigTom
Well-Known Member
5 Miles is an ~20min cycle ride.
Brainaddict
slight system overdrive
Train and bike was how I got there, a combination I would recommend to all able-bodied people for getting most places in the country. If you forgot the custard in your weekly shop, don't have custard that week. If you want convenience, live in denser developed areas like most people do. Then there's a shop around the corner. I would argue that most people in SE England these days choose to live in the sticks rather than in a place with amenities, and they've got used to being told they're free to make that choice as a lifestyle decision, just as they're free to make the choice to live 40 miles from their workplace as a lifestyle decision, with the only commute option being car. It's not that I would legislate against such things, but I would argue we should not be sustaining an infrastructure costing hundreds of billions of pounds in order to accommodate these selfish, destructive choices.
T & P
|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
It could be that some, many, or even most of those drivers observed 'driving in the countryside' were in fact travelling a far greater distance than a few miles, and not to buy custard either.
Very far fetched, I know. But still... did anyone actually conduct an on-the-spot survey to establish those drivers were all on a short distance shopping trip for a just a few items that could be transported on a bicycle?
Very far fetched, I know. But still... did anyone actually conduct an on-the-spot survey to establish those drivers were all on a short distance shopping trip for a just a few items that could be transported on a bicycle?
Brainaddict
slight system overdrive
I was brought up in the countryside, I don't need to do surveys to know the attitudes. Of course the custard example was just one example of the terrible uses of cars in the countryside. Another might be 'Oh, the queue for a table at the pub we came to for lunch is too long, let's drive ten miles up the road to the next pub we consider to have decent food'. It's an entire attitude about having the right to bomb around the countryside on the flimsiest of excuses. Then when you're challenged on the fact that you've set up your whole life so you have to drive hundreds of miles a week to get to work/do your leisure pursuits/get shopping/consume what you want, you pretend that the questioner is oppressing the poorest person in the village, who genuinely doesn't have anywhere else to move to and could probably do with some public transport.
Brainaddict
slight system overdrive
Let no-one say this thread doesn't do what it says in the title 
Saul Goodman
It's all good, man
Absolute elitist bollocks. Most people live where they can afford to live. Most people can't afford to live in the middle of London.
Brainaddict
slight system overdrive
Most people live in towns and cities. The poor who live in the countryside need public transport.
Also you clearly don't know the south east of England if you think the price divide is between London and the countryside.
Saul Goodman
It's all good, man
Has anybody noticed that most of these people crying for a ban on cars are middle-class and either retired or close to retiring, with a nice big house with a garden?
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
But people do have the right to drive ten miles to eat out, they always have in this country. So it's no surprise that they act as if they do.
In fact the only country I can think of where people may not have that right is North Korea.
Brainaddict
slight system overdrive
People used to have the right to harm the health of others by smoking in a pub. Thankfully times move on. What other forms of physical harm to others do you think we should continue enabling for the sake of our glorious traditions of freedom?
8ball
Maximum Facepalm
This kind of whingeing helps me think of a few...
8ball
Maximum Facepalm
How bad is it if I catch a tram to restaurant five miles away when there's a perfectly good restaurant 200 yards from my house?
Saul Goodman
It's all good, man
People still have a right to pollute the atmosphere with their selfish flights abroad. Are you one of these people?
8ball
Maximum Facepalm
And the right to eat bad food and neglect to do any exercise, placing stress on the NHS.
And the right to destroy the planet by turning their heating way up and leaving the lights on.
And the right to ride a motorbike, potentially orphaning their family (and they're not even required to be on the donor register).
IT'S AN OUTRAGE!!!
And the right to destroy the planet by turning their heating way up and leaving the lights on.
And the right to ride a motorbike, potentially orphaning their family (and they're not even required to be on the donor register).
IT'S AN OUTRAGE!!!
Saul Goodman
It's all good, man
It is indeed outrageous that people are allowed to do things.And the right to eat bad food and neglect to do any exercise, placing stress on the NHS.
And the right to destroy the planet by turning their heating way up and leaving the lights on.
And the right to ride a motorbike, potentially orphaning their family (and they're not even required to be on the donor register).
IT'S AN OUTRAGE!!!
I have to go and make a baby panda's eye and swan liver paté sandwich now, but I'll be back later.
Brainaddict
slight system overdrive
Well yes, you correctly highlight that we will have to change our entire lifestyles if we wish to make the planet livable in the future. I hope we can largely do it by positive reinforcement of more local and public transport-based ways of living, rather than reinforcing car-based and plane-based lifestyles. But I suspect some people will cling on to their right to ruin the planet so strongly that we may have to legislate against them eventually. Don't be that person.And the right to eat bad food and neglect to do any exercise, placing stress on the NHS.
And the right to destroy the planet by turning their heating way up and leaving the lights on.
And the right to ride a motorbike, potentially orphaning their family (and they're not even required to be on the donor register).
IT'S AN OUTRAGE!!!
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
How many people die in the clothing industry worldwide each year, what about other industries such as farming? Should we ban all these things or try to make them safer?
If that's your aim I'd start by banning useless things such as football - no utility value, massive stadia taking up space in most cities and towns, causes lots of pointless travel both within and between countries, as well as alcohol-fueled violence, nationalism, racism and homophobia. It's a planet-killing hate machine and must be stopped.
T & P
|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
If pollution is your main gripe about car usage, which is fair dos, presumably you have no objection to people owning and driving (from time to time at the least) electric cars?
8ball
Maximum Facepalm
I really enjoyed the break from football. One of very few good things to come from this pandemic.
Saul Goodman
It's all good, man
I'm certain he would be. It involves people enjoying themselves.
8ball
Maximum Facepalm
I'm coming over all "crusty reminiscer" now, but I can remember a time when those on this site had a generally positive attitude to the freedom to do all sorts of enjoyable things.
Even ones of questionable legality!
T & P
|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
Inevitable silly banter around this forum aside, I don’t think most people would disagree with this, car drivers included.
But there is not a single overwhelming culprit that would solve the world’s problems if it got rid of. We can all still drive, go on holidays, eat meat or do countless other non-essential activities, so long as we do less of it.
Nothing needs to be outright banned. And demonising the very existence of a certain mode of transport or denouncing anyone ever seen using it as contributing to destroying the planet or people’s health without knowing their particular habits is meaningless vindictive rubbish.
Someone who drives a gas guzzler daily to the local shops is an arsehole and is part of the problem. Someone who barely uses a car and a couple of times a year enjoys a weekend away in the countryside and travels in an efficient low-emissions car is doing nothing wrong or objectionable. Certainly not more than someone who takes several breaks by train and coach per year and whose annual CO2 contribution will undoubtedly be similar or higher than a frugal car user.
Of course we should aim to cut down on certain habits. But pretending that any and all car usage is objectionable and unjustifiable is blatant bullshit, and such irrational hostility undoubtedly does more harm than good to the cause.
Saul Goodman
It's all good, man
You only ever hear a certain type use that phrase.
But at least the fuel you weren't using was cheap.
