• KptnAutismus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    6 months ago

    they literally banned pop-up headlights because of “pedestrian safety”. how about having a real driving school system instead of letting people drive if they pass the test after the 1200th time by random chance?

    i do agree that a multi-ton stainless steel bomb is dangerous, but cars are inherently dangerous. that’s just something that needs to be adressed by proper training and infrastructure that makes collisions less likely.

    • Gigan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      6 months ago

      how about having a real driving school system instead of letting people drive if they pass the test after the 1200th time by random chance?

      I would love to make it more difficult for people to get (and keep!) a driver’s license, but I think we need to invest more in public transit first. Otherwise people will be stranded and unable to work, go to school, go to the store, etc. So many things require a car, and we need to get rid of that requirement first.

      • aard@kyu.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        6 months ago

        You have a bit of a chicken and egg problem here: Nobody wants to invest in public transport because everybody is driving by car, while nobody wants to use public transport, because it is shit. Increasing the lobby for better public transport by making it harder to drive could be useful there, assuming you make the state take care of the problem cases during the transition (here in Europe some countries cover costs of taxi fare for kids who can’t reach school within a reasonable time by public transit, for example)

        • KptnAutismus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          6 months ago

          you make it sound like the public transport system runs on donations by civilians. any reasonable politician would funnel some of the tax money into the system.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Nah; do it now. There’s never going to be enough political will for public transit until people are suffering for the lack of it.

    • assembly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 months ago

      This seems to be a great time to have that discussion. I think historically in the US, people just couldn’t get around with a car as our mass transit has been historically terrible but things are improving with ride share now (not nearly as good but better than nothing). Now that there are actually real alternatives to driving, we should be actively increasing the threshold to obtain a drivers license. I mean, we won’t, but we should.

      • Gigan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        6 months ago

        our mass transit has been historically terrible

        It wasn’t always terrible, it was gutted and attacked by auto-makers to pave way for the car.

        • assembly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          I forgot about that and yeah I remember reading about how car companies bought out trolly lines just to close them and force people into cars. So I shall amend my statement to our mass transit has been terrible across the past few decades.

      • skulblaka@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        6 months ago

        Uber is NOT an acceptable replacement for public transport and acting like it is, is foolish. A public transit system seeks to move people around, and make enough money to keep themselves alive. A rideshare app only seeks profit, and will move people around as a means to that end. They are diametrically opposed. Further privatizing things in America that should be public utilities is a very bad, no good, awful idea.

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      they literally banned pop-up headlights because of “pedestrian safety”.

      This is a really cool TIL!!

      Thanks for that tidbit

  • Gork@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    6 months ago

    Add to the fact that the cybertruck doesn’t have crumple zones, which are a basic safety feature in practically all cars and trucks made since the 2000s.

    If that thing hits you as a pedestrian or if you’re in a car, you will lose. Only having your own car crumple to absorb the impact will do little to dissuade the 7000 lb behemoth barreling towards you, either in a frontal collision or worse, a driver side impact.

      • Bongles@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        6 months ago

        Normally pickup trucks and SUVs in the USA are considered “light trucks” which have easier safety and emissions standards.

        I don’t really know the ins and outs if it though, I just watch videos on the internet.

        • Nougat@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yeah, “light trucks” also includes full size vans, minivans, SUVs. Which is a big reason why there are so many of those on the road: manufacturers don’t have to meet the same fuel economy or safety standards as passenger cars.

          • Robcia1220@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            This is why full size pickups are getting bigger. Each year the regulation requirements adjust so manufacturers adjust to avoid the to comply. This is why the incoming 2024 Toyota Tacoma is roughly the same size as full sized pickups in the 90’s.

      • KptnAutismus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        6 months ago

        compared to an f-150 lightning, it has roughly the same amount of crumpling. i think the panels around the front are just a little thinner than the steel panels the f-150 uses.

        but both are far more dangerous than your average hatchback due to the visibility alone. you are literally allowed to remove all rear-view mirrors in america.

        • EatYouWell@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          Iirc you only have to have one functional mirror, but that may vary by state.

          A rear-view mirror really isn’t super necessary, though. If you angle your side view mirrors right, you can see enough to drive safely.

          • KptnAutismus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            i do know the cybertruck has backup cameras and all that, but a little silver-coated piece of glass is hard to replace with cameras.

            but if it’s allowed to be sold, and people are buying it, i don’t have any say in that. i just wish people would be more aware of their surroundings.

            • EatYouWell@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              No, what I’m saying is that having a rear view isn’t necessary at all to drive safely. Panel vans, delivery trucks, semis, etc. don’t have them.

    • MrSpArkle@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      6 months ago

      There are videos online clearly showing the front crumpling in a crash test.

      The main danger to pedestrians over other such trucks is the sharp edges.

      The danger to other cars is the same age old problem with SUVs amplified by current battery density.

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Add to the fact that the cybertruck doesn’t have crumple zones

      This is a absolutely false and you can see it in videos and there is even an engineering discussion that describes how it works.

      The castings themselves have areas that begin weaker, and becoming increasingly stronger as the crash moves further into the casting.

      It disperses the energy as it crumples.

      This isn’t even new to their CT castings, it’s designed into their other vehicles as well.

  • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    6 months ago

    I’ve got a Volvo wagon, which is not exactly a tiny car. I parked next to a new GMC Sierra 2500 and the hood of that truck is level with the roof of my car.

    • hips_and_nips@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Nice! What year?

      I used to have an ‘03 V70R. I could fit all my band gear in it at the time: amp, 4x12, several guitars, an 88 key piano, two 61 key synths, keyboard stands, AND my singer in the front seat!

      Not tiny at all!

        • Delphia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Ive got an 08 V70. Specifically didnt go to a v60 because I saw someone move a single door fridge in their v70 and I thought “I want that”

        • curiousaur
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Is it stupid to know that in a collision my family won’t get crushed? It’s an arms race, and I’m not gonna lose it. Are you?

          • Magiccupcake@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            Well I bike to work, so take that how you will.

            Personally I’d rather advacote for safer roads for everyone, and transit options that doesn’t turn into an arms race, like buses, trains and biking where possible.

            Also get hit by a semi, tell me how you win that arms race.

            • curiousaur
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              I live in a rural area. Miles into the county from town. Two lane road, no barrier, drunk rednecks in huge trucks flying past use on the way home and back. You’d better believe I’d out my wife and kid in an actual tank if I had the ability.

              If you tried to ride your bike here, you die the same day.

              • Magiccupcake@startrek.website
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                I’m sorry that the area you live in has decided that transportation can carry a serious risk of death. Roads can be desinged in a safer manner, even when people are drunk.

                Transit options are workable even in rural areas when designed correctly.

                • curiousaur
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Maybe. I’ve lived in a city with great transit. I lived there for years biking around mostly, and putting my bike on transit. I left because I was sick of the crime and didn’t want to raise a family near that crime.

                  I love raising my kids in acres of redwoods and fern, miles down a deadend road. I have my own pond, full of carp, Koi and mosquito-fish. There would never be transit here, there’s not enough density with each lot being 2 - 20 acres.

                  The road could theoretically be made safer for bikes via bike lanes, but that would require widening the road to make room for bikes, using imminent domain at a county level to take people’s land to do so, only for almost no one to ever use it.

                  I think you’re someone who lives in a city and is actually quite ignorant to what rural life is really like. I’ve lived in cities most of my life and am only new to rural life, and let me tell you, the body on frame 4 wheel drive SUV is justified out here. I’m even looking for a truck, as well as an even larger 3 - 4 row vehicle for hauling groups of people places.

                  I’ve been on the list for the cybertruck since 2019, and as crazy as it sounds might actually get it.