• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    137 hours ago

    Is there a place where cars crash commonly into buildings? Looks like an incredibly rare event

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      156 hours ago

      It’s not rare in North America. If this article is to be believed, it happens on the order of about 100 times per day in the U.S.

      It’s honestly baffling how incorrectly the U.S is built.

      • @grue
        link
        English
        6
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        It’s honestly baffling how incorrectly the U.S is built.

        It’s easy to understand once you realize that the secret ingredient was racism.

        Basically, it’s because of a combination of mid-century modernist utopian urbanism (a big influence was Frank Lloyd Wright’s “Broadacre City,” which was really closer to the opposite of a city) and the effort to find new ways to perpetuate racism despite SCOTUS outlawing de-jure segregation.

        More specifically, the newly-created FHA came up with preferred development patterns that were low-density and car-centric in part because it was expensive and therefore helped exclude black people, then redlined everything that didn’t conform to that preference in order to deny black people financing for their homes and businesses.

        (This reply lacks a lot of detail and nuance, mainly because I’m writing it on my phone and lack access to references to cite.)

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -12 hours ago

        I’ve lived my entire life here, and I have never in my life seen a car crash into a building, or the aftermath of a car crashing into a building.

        For over 30 of those years, I’ve lived in two of the 10 largest cities.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          42 hours ago

          I’ve never witnessed neither a car crash nor a gunshot here in Sweden, yet I know they happen at non-zero rates in my country.

          The point being, anecdotal experience has no bearing on the actual frequency of events.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      0
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      I thought the same way. Where the hell is that common?

      This channel is always saying things like the Netherlands is heaven and everything good about the country is exclusive to the Netherlands and that the country is perfect with absolutely no faults.

      I stopped watching the videos because it felt like every video was just an advertisement from the Netherlands tourist department.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    59 hours ago

    Am I supposed to acually watch that video or can I just use the most basic common sense?

    Separating car traffic from bike traffic from pedestrian traffic adds a lot of layers between cars and buildings, while measures to calm down traffic -to protect those bikers and pedestrians- also reduces severe crashes (and you would need a lot of force to actually damage a building).

    • Instantnudel
      link
      fedilink
      English
      78 hours ago

      I always watch Not Just Bikes even tho its often common sense because his videos are kinda relaxing xD

      His calm voice over some random footage of bikes driving around. Peak content haha

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    211 hours ago

    The primary reason is most people can’t drive. I don’t mean they can’t mechanically operate a vehicle and make it move, I mean they lack the skill required to do so competently and safely.

    • RubberDuck
      link
      English
      139 hours ago

      Haha, this is exactly what the video is about! You are victim blaming. Road infrastructure should accommodate and encourage the type of driving you want… and wide straight roads encourage faster driving leading to more and more serious accidents.

      People are fallable, so design streets that are narrower and add complexity, separate traffic types and see the difference.

        • RubberDuck
          link
          English
          46 hours ago

          Again… the issue is predominantly a systemic issue that hides itself from responsibility by pushing the responsibility to the individual without looking at the systemic causes.

          Noone is saying the individual does not bear some responsibility, but making appropriate changes to the roads will help general safety more.

          The US roads are so wide that they can easily be narrowed and a protected (separated with grass and trees) bikelane and sidewalk installed. Add some curves and watch this issue dissapear without doing anything on the PeRsOnAl ReSpOnSiBiLiTy!! Side of things. Plus it makes cities bikeable and more livable.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            26 hours ago

            Sure but from what I have heard the USA has terribly low requirements for a license.

            Both things should be done and the later is much cheaper and easier because you don’t have to rebuild every single road.

        • @grue
          link
          English
          36 hours ago

          License requirements can’t be strict unless the infrastructure makes accommodations for people who fail. The US is so car-centric that driving has to effectively be an entitlement, even though it’s supposed to be a privilege, in order for people not to be stranded at home.

    • @Tudsamfa
      link
      English
      1311 hours ago

      Are you sure it’s not that the road design is much safer in the Netherlands, like the video said?

      You seem to do exactly what the video is criticising: finding someone at fault and moving on, instead of changing the street design so that a lack of skill does not result in catastophic crashes.

    • Tar_Alcaran
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      6
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      In the field of safety there is a concept called a “normal accident”, or a system accident. Basically it says that in any complex system catastrophic accidents will always happen, because they are impossible to foresee (due to complexity) and thus prevent. That theory says you need to prepare for the consequence of the accident just as much as try to prevent it.

      So, people are always going to lose control, you need to prepare for when it happens.

    • Diplomjodler
      link
      English
      311 hours ago

      I’d say 90% are more or less competent. 10% are idiots and 1% are dangerous morons. A lot of the problem could actually be solved by regular retests.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    211 hours ago

    We should also blame car manufacturers. Why are cars built to accelerate to 100 in a few seconds from standstill? If you’re parked (and the car can know the difference between being parked and a traffic light), why is acceleration not restricted? There is no reason for being able to accelerate like that in a parking space. You should get a much slower acceleration by default and car manufacturers could put that in their cars right now.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      711 hours ago

      Or people could actually learn how to drive, then pay attention while driving, or they have their driving privileges revoked…

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        47 hours ago

        Isn’t this precisely the “personal responsibility” argument called out in the video? Looking for someone to blame instead of putting that aside and looking for ways to simply making accidents less likely to happen?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1211 hours ago

        You could also use that argument against emergency braking systems and airbags. If there is a string of accidents, you should search for a solution to prevent them. Just blaming people does nothing