Not Just Bikes / r/fuckcars / Urbanists / New Urbanism / Car-Free / Anti-Car - People and grifters who hate personal transport, freedom, cars, roads, suburbs, and are obsessed with city planning and urban design

[Xarpho's Return]

Awww, he forgot about us:

I obviously can't quote the whole post but do what I can:

They moved to a better city and it's fine, but somehow me leaving the continent is the worst crime imaginable.

You mean "social issue". I thought crime didn't exist!

Here's their stance on urbanism:

Other than trying to avoid sprawl, I see nothing about "suburbs are subsidized by the city!!!" and that the whole thing seems rather antithetical to what Chuck actually proposes.

They actually say zoning is fine if it restricts sexually-oriented businesses, which at least elaborates on the vague "abolish all zoning except where it's convenient to me". But a lot of what "urbanity" requires is selling out your community. A large apartment building almost certainly won't be "locally owned" and the argument of four-plexes and other "missing middle" housing falling into decline by absentee landlords is only dismissed as "REEEEEE NIMBY SCUM" instead of pointing to "well, if we had locally-controlled multi-family housing that would be less likely to happen".

 

[An Sionnach Seang]

And you don't get wet if you're driving in the rain, which is a massive plus considering British weather.

plus, your vehicle's wheels won't lose all friction when going through wet drifts of fallen leaves (a big problem on country roads at this time of year; harmless on a motorbike and a car, as they both have very similar tyres, but lethal on a pedal bike)

 

[Xarpho's Return]

lus, your vehicle's wheels won't lose all friction when going through wet drifts of fallen leaves (a big problem on country roads at this time of year; harmless on a motorbike and a car, as they both have very similar tyres, but lethal on a pedal bike)

A bicycle is a lot more vulnerable to a lot of things. Even rails, which is "good" urbanism, can be catastrophic to a bicycle if it doesn't hit it a perpendicular angle.

Warning signs exist but you know most cyclists are too stupid or arrogant to use them.

 

[quaawaa]

plus, your vehicle's wheels won't lose all friction when going through wet drifts of fallen leaves (a big problem on country roads at this time of year; harmless on a motorbike and a car, as they both have very similar tyres, but lethal on a pedal bike)

A bicycle is a lot more vulnerable to a lot of things. Even rails, which is "good" urbanism, can be catastrophic to a bicycle if it doesn't hit it a perpendicular angle.

Warning signs exist but you know most cyclists are too stupid or arrogant to use them.
View attachment 5520742

I know several people who’ve had bicycle accidents. In every single case, they lost traction on something like wet leaves or tram tracks. None of them were hit by cars and all of them were on either bike trails or protected bike lanes. If they had listened to urbanists and not worn a helmet because “all bike accidents are due to cars, safety is an infrastructure problem” they’d be braindead or worse.

That’s why I get so pissed off when they advocate against wearing helmets because they’re more afraid of the friction of having to put on a helmet making someone decide not to bike than protecting that person’s life.

 

[WelperHelper99]

People who tell him that running from his problems isn't productive are just jealous of his wealth or too attached to their family and friends:

Maybe I like my area Jason, maybe I love my family unlike you, who has daddy issues

Someone points out that cities around the world are building more transit. Jason tells them it doesn't count because they're run by Progressives:

Bitch. There are more cities in the world improving transit than just the big ones. Local ones too. It all depends on the needs and terrain of the area.

wasn't happy when someone said that if a train isn't full then it's a waste of space:

Running ten barely used trains a hour vs 1 wastes on gas, increases wear on the trains, and requires more operators to man said trains.

 

[Marvin]

OP wasn't happy when someone said that if a train isn't full then it's a waste of space:

It's a waste of energy.

I know several people who’ve had bicycle accidents. In every single case, they lost traction on something like wet leaves or tram tracks. None of them were hit by cars and all of them were on either bike trails or protected bike lanes. If they had listened to urbanists and not worn a helmet because “all bike accidents are due to cars, safety is an infrastructure problem” they’d be braindead or worse.

That’s why I get so pissed off when they advocate against wearing helmets because they’re more afraid of the friction of having to put on a helmet making someone decide not to bike than protecting that person’s life.

Anyone advocating against wearing helmets is a shithead.

 

[An Sionnach Seang]

I know several people who’ve had bicycle accidents. In every single case, they lost traction on something like wet leaves or tram tracks. None of them were hit by cars and all of them were on either bike trails or protected bike lanes. If they had listened to urbanists and not worn a helmet because “all bike accidents are due to cars, safety is an infrastructure problem” they’d be braindead or worse.

Anyone advocating against wearing helmets is a shithead.

about 8 years ago I had a crash on my motorbike; a driver had pulled out onto a major rural road into 50+ mph traffic without looking, I couldn't stop safely in time, I hit him right in the side and went sailing over the top, smashing up my thigh and several bones in my foot when I landed
because I had full motorbike-standard impact-absorbing gear on, they were my only injuries; by contrast, a bloke in the same ward as me had had a pedal-bike accident, in an area at the edge of the city and the countryside, at much lower speed, without any protection apart from a helmet, and had the most appalling injuries; broken ribs, a mangled arm, all sorts
really, if you're on two wheels, you need all the protection you can get

 

[F-14 Tomcat]

I know several people who’ve had bicycle accidents. In every single case, they lost traction on something like wet leaves or tram tracks. None of them were hit by cars and all of them were on either bike trails or protected bike lanes. If they had listened to urbanists and not worn a helmet because “all bike accidents are due to cars, safety is an infrastructure problem” they’d be braindead or worse.

That’s why I get so pissed off when they advocate against wearing helmets because they’re more afraid of the friction of having to put on a helmet making someone decide not to bike than protecting that person’s life.

Do urbanists seriously advocate against helmet usage? I've always considered a bike helmet analogous to a car's seatbelt. You don't really need one to get going, but in the event of an accident it will almost always be better to have it than not. The arguments against them all sound the same to me too. Maybe brain damage from unprotected bike accidents explains the behavior of some of these guys.

 

[Yaks]

Listen, I had to put some work into my car, but even with that you're looking at $2900+ roughly 1000 in repairs, and even then, with gas costs... I'm no where close to 75k. Even LIFECYCLE COSTS, the car from my research is basically dead at 180k miles, and I'm just barely half way to that, and plan on getting something better before then, something old but solid like a old Lincon for 5-6k. Even then, I could always overhaul the car at 180k miles and keep it running, it's just a machine after all

If you want an older car that'll live forever off pure spite and probably sand in the gas tank, nab yourself an older Toyota. I've got two still trucking along that's just over 400k and about to hit 500k miles. Most I do are general maintenance, and had to replace an alternator about 8 years back.

 

[Susanna]

Do urbanists seriously advocate against helmet usage? I've always considered a bike helmet analogous to a car's seatbelt. You don't really need one to get going, but in the event of an accident it will almost always be better to have it than not. The arguments against them all sound the same to me too. Maybe brain damage from unprotected bike accidents explains the behavior of some of these guys.

It's one of their counterarguments to "but I don't want to carry a bike helmet around everywhere", since it's not like a motorcycle where you can just lock your helmet to the bike itself. You either bring it along or lose it. So rather than say "Suck it up, your future if I have it my way is you carry that bike helmet around all day", they say "You don't have to wear a helmet, that's just a carbrain plot to shift the blame for your inevitable brain damage off themselves!". Because I guess if you feel sufficiently righteous about it, brain damage is alright.

 

[F-14 Tomcat]

It's one of their counterarguments to "but I don't want to carry a bike helmet around everywhere", since it's not like a motorcycle where you can just lock your helmet to the bike itself. You either bring it along or lose it. So rather than say "Suck it up, your future if I have it my way is you carry that bike helmet around all day", they say "You don't have to wear a helmet, that's just a carbrain plot to shift the blame for your inevitable brain damage off themselves!". Because I guess if you feel sufficiently righteous about it, brain damage is alright.

You know, in all my years riding a bike I've ate shit thanks to loose gravel, wet leaves, rocks in the road, swerving to avoid someone, trying to ride a flat tire (goatheads are vicious little fuckers), and a million other things. None of those were being hit by a car. This is all the carbrains' fault.

 

[An Sionnach Seang]

If you want an older car that'll live forever off pure spite and probably sand in the gas tank, nab yourself an older Toyota. I've got two still trucking along that's just over 400k and about to hit 500k miles. Most I do are general maintenance, and had to replace an alternator about 8 years back.

or do what I did and get an old Rover 25 that only had 57,000 miles on the clock despite it being 16 years old; it cost me £1,300 up front and no costs after that
as a bonus, some time later I found out it was made after the takeover of Rover by BMW, so under the bonnet, a good 80% of it is an unadvertised BMW with 100 bhp from a 1.4 L petrol engine

 

[Shlomo]

It's one of their counterarguments to "but I don't want to carry a bike helmet around everywhere", since it's not like a motorcycle where you can just lock your helmet to the bike itself. You either bring it along or lose it. So rather than say "Suck it up, your future if I have it my way is you carry that bike helmet around all day", they say "You don't have to wear a helmet, that's just a carbrain plot to shift the blame for your inevitable brain damage off themselves!". Because I guess if you feel sufficiently righteous about it, brain damage is alright.

lol these people are all ready brain dead, I have to ride to work because poor fag also always wear a helmet you can leave that shit on your handlebars, I would love to get the largest gas guzzler I can find out of spite of thees retards.

 

[Yaks]

It's one of their counterarguments to "but I don't want to carry a bike helmet around everywhere", since it's not like a motorcycle where you can just lock your helmet to the bike itself. You either bring it along or lose it. So rather than say "Suck it up, your future if I have it my way is you carry that bike helmet around all day", they say "You don't have to wear a helmet, that's just a carbrain plot to shift the blame for your inevitable brain damage off themselves!". Because I guess if you feel sufficiently righteous about it, brain damage is alright.

It's not that hard to get baskets and/or side saddles for bikes these days to put the helmet in. In fact if you're using a bike as your daily runner you probably want that. In a small ranch town I lived in for a while, one of the poorer townies had attached those big rectangular cat litter tubs with lids on to the sides of his to haul groceries back and forth. There was an elderly lady who used those children tow behind carriers.

Or just you know.. leave it on the handlebars. If someone is going to steal something it's not going to be the helmet, they're going to take the whole bike.

 

[Chuck McGill]

It's one of their counterarguments to "but I don't want to carry a bike helmet around everywhere", since it's not like a motorcycle where you can just lock your helmet to the bike itself. You either bring it along or lose it. So rather than say "Suck it up, your future if I have it my way is you carry that bike helmet around all day", they say "You don't have to wear a helmet, that's just a carbrain plot to shift the blame for your inevitable brain damage off themselves!". Because I guess if you feel sufficiently righteous about it, brain damage is alright.

Broke: You don't need to wear a helmet, protecting against head trauma is just a carbrain conspiracy so they can get away with murdering six million of us every day! REEEEEEEE
Woke: Suck it up, carry the helmet around.
Bespoke: You're a brain-damaged redditor anyway, head trauma can't make that any worse.

 

[An Sionnach Seang]

you can leave that shit on your handlebars

lol no you can't, these days anything that moves is guaranteed to get stolen
if it doesn't move, it'll get set on fire or smashed to bits, and insurance firms will deliver the verdict that's it was your fault for owning it in the first place

 

[Trennschleifer]

Link to the post
Link to the archive

Need I say more? I'm gonna sue my apartment now for my action of putting on slippery socks and falling down the stairs which they have built!
I love that concept of suing a manufacturer for human misuse / error of their equipment, same with "Gonna sue Smith and Wesson cuz my kid got shot with a gun made by them" instead of just suing and pressing charges against the perp. Lol, lmao, even.

 

[Shlomo]

lol no you can't, these days anything that moves is guaranteed to get stolen
if it doesn't move, it'll get set on fire or smashed to bits, and insurance firms will deliver the verdict that's it was your fault for owning it in the first place

Or lock it up with your chain, I’ve never had my shitty old helmet taken, might have different results with a newer one though.

 

[Markass the Worst]

Need I say more? I'm gonna sue my apartment now for my action of putting on slippery socks and falling down the stairs which they have built!
I love that concept of suing a manufacturer for human misuse / error of their equipment, same with "Gonna sue Smith and Wesson cuz my kid got shot with a gun made by them" instead of just suing and pressing charges against the perp. Lol, lmao, even.

I want to sue the judge that let out the criminal out on bond that killed my son.

Oh, wait, judges have absolute immunity.

 

[Trennschleifer]

I want to sue the judge that let out the criminal out on bond that killed my son.

Oh, wait, judges have absolute immunity.

They might have immunity, but they also have ad-

(Satire)