this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2025
1158 points (100.0% liked)

Fuck Cars

12223 readers
2517 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The tables on the road were only there for the inauguration day, but bike lane is here to stay.

https://www.lavoixdunord.fr/1596032/article/2025-06-14/lomme-apaise-securise-et-cyclable-le-bourg-renove-prefigure-l-avenue-de

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 38 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I was being inconsiderate and dangerous in traffic, and it's the other guy's fault

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (4 children)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

You're still part of traffic when you're on foot. And yes, it was 100% your fault and the cyclist was right to be pissed.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Was it a cycle path or a foot path?

If it was a cycle path, then you are allowed to cross it on foot, but you aren't allowed to walk on it.

If you blindly wandered onto a road and a driver got angry because he almost hit you because of that, would you also believe you had the right to throw his car off a bridge?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

Neither (or both?), it was an overcrowded walkable canal bank in the height of summer with faint paint marks to delimit the path of the bike "lane". I was in the wrong in any case, what I'm complaining about is the dude's reaction. My point is you have to be able to share the space and safely navigate what is inevitably going to be a crowded area at that time of year, especially when riding a bicycle which can be dangerous in its own right.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 21 hours ago

So it was a bike lane that you were on. Being to dumb to understand what a bike lane is and that a bike lane is for, you know, bikes is not an excuse.

You complain about that dude's reaction but wanted to commit theft/vandalism and think you are justified in that?

You are the idiot who actively made riding a bike dangerous in that situation and still believe you are justified?

Let me guess, you are American?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

If you walk onto a freeway, on foot, you are being reckless. It's the same for bike lanes. Look where you walk.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago

That literally doesn't change what he said.