A strawman is making an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent’s real argument.
You know you can’t defeat the argument that walking in the street at night with dark clothes on is stupid and dangerous, so you keep pulling things out of your ass that have literally nothing to do with the discussion to shift the blame to motor vehicle operators.
You also keep blatantly ignoring the points that refute your strawmen, because you know you can’t defend your position.
No one said anything about speeding, crossing the road, or anything of that nature.
The entire discussion is about how walking in the road and not being easily visible is dangerous and stupid. That’s it. Full stop.
But I know all of this is pointless because you’re either a troll arguing in bad faith, or have an IQ lower than the posted speed limit of a residential street.
You also keep blatantly ignoring the points that refute your strawmen, because you know you can’t defend your position.
No one said anything about speeding, crossing the road, or anything of that nature.
The entire discussion is about how walking in the road and not being easily visible is dangerous and stupid. That’s it. Full stop.
And you are deliberately ignoring everything I’ve said, such as my explanation of what I meant when I said ‘speeding’. I’ve made myself clear that I am talking about people crossing the road, as there very fewother reasons for people to be in the road, and I don’t believe that there are swarms of people just walking in the middle of the road for no reason.
There is no strawman, because the basis of your argument is that people need to make themselves more visible to avoid being hit by cars. The vast majority of accidents, however, occur due to: distracted or inebriated drivers; or drivers driving too fast for the road conditions. Pedestrians will never be visible enough to prevent these accidents, yet you seem to think that the solution to reducing pedestrian accidents is ‘more visibility’.
You’re arguing points that were never part of the discussion and are not related to the discussion at all, trying to refute my argument.
That’s a strawman, because no shit it’s on speeders and impaired drivers if they hit something. And you keep doing it. Again, at no point were crosswalks, speeding, or impaired driving being discussed. You brought that up unprompted.
Maybe it’s not an issue where you live, but where I live people walk down streets (not across them) at night in dark clothes, which is stupid and dangerous.
You also seem to have this belief that the driver has to be doing something wrong to hit a road hazard. You’re very wrong.
Again, unless you expect everyone to drive 10mph everywhere, the human reaction speed has its limit. You can be doing everything exactly right and still hit an object in the road that’s not supposed to be in the road,especially if it takes a few fractions of a second to be able to see them. People count as an object that doesn’t belong in the road.
Did you just learn the word strawman or something?. You don’t have to (incorrectly) throw it into every comment you write…
A strawman is making an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent’s real argument.
You know you can’t defeat the argument that walking in the street at night with dark clothes on is stupid and dangerous, so you keep pulling things out of your ass that have literally nothing to do with the discussion to shift the blame to motor vehicle operators.
You also keep blatantly ignoring the points that refute your strawmen, because you know you can’t defend your position.
No one said anything about speeding, crossing the road, or anything of that nature.
The entire discussion is about how walking in the road and not being easily visible is dangerous and stupid. That’s it. Full stop.
But I know all of this is pointless because you’re either a troll arguing in bad faith, or have an IQ lower than the posted speed limit of a residential street.
And you are deliberately ignoring everything I’ve said, such as my explanation of what I meant when I said ‘speeding’. I’ve made myself clear that I am talking about people crossing the road, as there very fewother reasons for people to be in the road, and I don’t believe that there are swarms of people just walking in the middle of the road for no reason.
There is no strawman, because the basis of your argument is that people need to make themselves more visible to avoid being hit by cars. The vast majority of accidents, however, occur due to: distracted or inebriated drivers; or drivers driving too fast for the road conditions. Pedestrians will never be visible enough to prevent these accidents, yet you seem to think that the solution to reducing pedestrian accidents is ‘more visibility’.
You’re arguing points that were never part of the discussion and are not related to the discussion at all, trying to refute my argument.
That’s a strawman, because no shit it’s on speeders and impaired drivers if they hit something. And you keep doing it. Again, at no point were crosswalks, speeding, or impaired driving being discussed. You brought that up unprompted.
Maybe it’s not an issue where you live, but where I live people walk down streets (not across them) at night in dark clothes, which is stupid and dangerous.
You also seem to have this belief that the driver has to be doing something wrong to hit a road hazard. You’re very wrong.
Again, unless you expect everyone to drive 10mph everywhere, the human reaction speed has its limit. You can be doing everything exactly right and still hit an object in the road that’s not supposed to be in the road,especially if it takes a few fractions of a second to be able to see them. People count as an object that doesn’t belong in the road.