A driver murdered him, not a sentient SUV.
this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2025
328 points (98.0% liked)
Fuck Cars
10452 readers
1000 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 Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don'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 topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do 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:
- [meta] for discussions/suggestions about this community itself
- [article] for news articles
- [blog] for any blog-style content
- [video] for video resources
- [academic] for academic studies and sources
- [discussion] for text post questions, rants, and/or discussions
- [meme] for memes
- [image] for any non-meme images
- [misc] for anything that doesn’t fall cleanly into any of the other categories
Recommended communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Then a murderous entitled driver in an SUV crushed him.
Was the title edited? Cuz it clearly says 'driver in an SUV'.
Yes: I had to edit the title to add the driver part, because the deliberately minimizing and car-supremacist loaded language in the original title mentioned only the SUV and not the driver at all.
But, point taken that I should've edited it even more.
Probably not far from the latter and regardless, the widespread presence of these vehicles in cities makes everyone less safe no matter the intentions of the drivers.
As a concept SUVs should not exist.
They are unstable, heavy and slower to react than normal cars, also the proportions of the design of the SUV are ugly.
That's missing the point. The point is that this inhuman prick felt entitled to drive in the bike lane, ran over a cyclist's foot, then killed the cyclist for having the audacity to object to having his foot run over.
None of that had anything to do with SUVs. Trying to make it about SUVs is, in my view, often a derailment tactic to distract from the real issue of driver entitlement. Fair warning, I will have very little tolerance for that in this thread.
Ok, first of all, I fully agree with you, this is a horrible tragedy regardless of what type of car or bike was involved.
I didn't try do shift blame or derail anything, calm down, I just woke up when I wrote that.
Don't treat people don't confess their undying support for your cause as the enemy, that is letting perfect be the enemy of good.
Maybe you weren't trying to do anything, but I've seen too often what happens when comments like yours get posted. The result is not productive, and I'm sick of it to the point that it's become kind of a pet peeve. My goal was to head that off as gently as possible but also as unequivocally as necessary.
Anyway, being calm and giving you the benefit of the doubt is why you got a reply and not a mod action. Well, that and the need to mention the "fair warning" part, which was directed at everybody, not just you.
Edit: by the way, "horrible tragedy" carries a connotation of it being an accident. This wasn't that. This was a monstrous purposeful act by someone whose mind had been corrupted by driving.
The "horrible tragedy" is the loss of a 27yr old that was completely unnecessary. A murder is still a horrible tragedy.
“horrible tragedy” carries a connotation of it being an accident.
Since there are no connotative dictionaries I cannot definitively say you are incorrect, but I'm willing to climb out on that limb anyway. You are incorrect.
I won't argue that the driver's behavior is the main issue, however smaller and lighter vehicles with lowers hoods are more forgiving in accidents involving pedestrains and cyclists. The design of trucks and SUVs are more dangerous, which then makes agressive drivers even more dangerous as well. We'll never be able to fully eliminate entitlement and roadrage, but we can limit the designs of vehicles on our streets and the lisencing requirements for them.
We'll never be able to fully eliminate entitlement and roadrage
Sure we can, at least in cities. There's no entitled driver road rage if nobody's driving.
Eh, we will need transportation for goods to stores and deliveries to offices.
But I am all for banning personal cars in cities.
I have an idea for a completely infeasable new type of city, it would be super cool, but at the moment I believe that only China would have the resources for it.
The city would need to be planned from the start.
Building it would start with digging tunnels beneath the new city, there would be four levels.
- Pedestrian Metro.
- Local freight rail for deliveries.
- Clean utillities (fresh water, power and coms)
- Sweage.
For system 2 you would have a system with driverless trains, with stations at every block or where a big customer would be, you would also need to build an underground transfer point, where trucks and trains would arrive and goods would be sorted to local freight lines. At the customer stations you would have a system where freight cages would roll out to individual locked cages for local customers to pick up and walk back to their facility through underground walkways at the same level.
As the city grows the first underground transfer point would be demoted to another sorting facility and the truck access would be cut off.
There's a lot of hate and anger here directed against the driver, who was of course himself full of hate and anger. He should rot in hell etc etc, it's all very American. None of that will solve anything. This is about systems. Paris is too dense for cars, let alone SUVs, but humans like their cars and will buy them and use them if we don't decide collectively to prevent it. The tragedy here was not that one entitled guy blew a gasket and did something he surely regretted instantly, it's that we all, together, allowed this situation to occur. A rush-hour boulevard crammed with too-big cars, in a city which is already as dense as a hothouse, in a country with increasingly angry and polarized politics. The problem is not individuals, it's systems.
I'm sorry if if this is too sophisticated an argument for this community, but I speak with direct experience of the subject at hand and I would like to see the problem actually solved. Anger directed at this individual miscreant is IMO an almost irrelevant distraction that will not solve anything.
This seems to fit with the vibe of this community. A lot of us advocate for physical and systematic changes to the transportion system to reduce and prevent incidents like this. Protective infrastructure like protected lanes, lane narrowing, raised crossings and bollards are frequently mentioned alongside speed reductions and transit alternatives. We know people are humans and they are just existing within the systems and biases created, we want to build a better world where those systems are safer for everyone, not just the people enclosed in their high speed metal boxes.
This was 100% murder how do you accidentally: drive in the bike lane over a curb, run over his foot, back up, then run over the rest of him, and drive away before police arrive. I hope they throw the book at the driver.
With his daughter in the car.... And then he comes crying saying he didn't meant it? I hope he rot in jail
He murdered someone in front of his daughter?! God damn, she's gonna need a lot of therapy.
Poppop dindu nuffin mate
is this meant to be racist?
Yes, I hate rich people 🐸
improvised pepe?
The SUV was the murder weapon. the driver murdered him.
For Americans, this is an example of a problem with 2nd amendment law. More and more people are choosing cars as their weapon, but US law has not caught up. We need to treat cars with the same respect as guns. Cars should not need registration, licensing, or insurance. Cars are armaments not transportation.