this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2025
139 points (97.9% liked)

Fuck Cars

13022 readers
585 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
 
top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DrunkEngineer@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Business owners are also sending threatening letters to bike lane supporters.

[–] beansbeansbeans@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

They can fuck right off. Truth isn't defamatory. Boycotts are legal.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Wouldn't a bike lane supporter basically be able to send the same letter but complaining about the business protesting the DOT? This is 100% the law firm using its title to imply that protesting is illegal and the firm will sue anyone found voicing an opinion different than theirs.

[–] TauZero@mander.xyz 5 points 1 day ago

Fuck, I would have personally benefited from these bike lanes! Whenever I'm in Astoria and want to bike on 31st Street, I always have to do this slalom between the columns. When lanesplitting in the driving lane there, there is not enough space for cars to pass safely, and New York drivers WILL NOT suffer the indignity of driving behind a bicyclist. So I have to slalom into the parking lane whenever a rush of cars approaches from behind, then slalom back when they have passed to stay out of the door zone, because there is not enough space in the parking lane to pass safely either, again because of the columns and also double parkers. It's challenging but tiring. Ironically the reason I want to be on 31st Street is because that's where all the businesses are! For now it's just too annoying though so I usually just go eat elsewhere.

[–] teft@piefed.social 34 points 1 day ago

Fucking nimbys as usual. "Oh we don't disapprove of a bike lane, just not one on this street."

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 25 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Reminder that anything "local business owners" say about things affecting the amount of customers they have has had zero ethos since the 90s when smoking in restaurants was banned. The "local business owners" complained nonstop about it but traffic actually went up as non-smokers went out to eat more.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 20 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yep, every time a bike lane was put in against the objections of 'local business owners', those same businesses end up thriving afterwards, this is a global phenomenon. Yet despite decades of precedent they need to be dragged kicking and screaming.

[–] kinsnik@lemmy.world 24 points 1 day ago (1 children)

god, nimbys are so fucking dishonest and stupid. bike lanes increase revenue and create a safer environment. nimbys want to have a worse business in a less safe street as long as they don't have to take 30 more seconds of unloading their deliveries

[–] bassad@jlai.lu 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Plus they could use the bike lane as personnal parking and unload their deliveries

/s just in case

[–] TheFrirish@jlai.lu 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Damn if that was me in Charge, I would reward them by making the whole street a car park for SUV's enjoy your safety dumbasses

Edit: scrap the car park, let's just make it a one way small highway with barriers.

[–] tyler@programming.dev 12 points 1 day ago

Wouldn’t the “safety issues” mean that the project should go through? That owner states there’s tons of visibility issues, aren’t cars the ones with worse visibility in the first place? And then you add in higher speeds and worse stopping distance. It sounds like the street shouldn’t be open for cars at all!

[–] NarrativeBear@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

Most of these business owners should then be open to the idea we move their shop as is, and put it right up to a highway. Where the front door opens right into a lane of car traffic.