this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2025
184 points (94.7% liked)

Fuck Cars

13067 readers
1021 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
 

Number of carjackings in DC:

Number of car crashes in DC:

Not wearing a seat belt makes you 30 times more likely to be ejected during a crash:

https://teendriversource.research.chop.edu/teen-crash-risks-prevention/rules-of-the-road/seat-belt-use-facts-and-stats

This man does not understand mathematics!!!!

top 49 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] grue@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

I appreciate that you tried to steer the discussion to be more about how driving is orders of magnitude more dangerous than the bullshit this politician is fearmongering about, but this is still pretty off-topic. I'm not removing it this time (in part because there was already a significant number of comments by the time I noticed it), but I was pretty on-the-fence about it and similar posts are likely to be removed in the future.

[–] frustrated_phagocytosis@fedia.io 70 points 1 week ago (1 children)

A black guy got his window punched out and was dragged out of his car and beat up by the cops for "not wearing a seatbelt". Anyone who doesn't carry proof of citizenship can be hauled away by ICE on the pretext of "not wearing a searbelt". But sure, tell everyone how your white privilege lets you get away with not wearing one, fuckface.

[–] doingthestuff@lemy.lol 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

That's class privilege in my opinion. But I suppose I could consider - why not both?

[–] turtlesareneat@discuss.online 2 points 1 week ago

Would a white guy of the same income level be subject to the same treatment?

[–] LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

No shit it's both, have you never heard of intersectionality before?

[–] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 38 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

To be fair he could think that carjacking means masturbating while driving.

[–] bear@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Honestly, that makes more sense than not wearing a seat belt so people won't forcibly take your car. How is that even supposed to help?

[–] Malfeasant@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

It's not so they won't forcibly take your car, it's so you won't get tangled up in the seatbelt when they yank you out. Stupid any way you look at it considering how unlikely one thing is to happen vs the other, but at least there is some logic to it.

[–] VitoRobles@lemmy.today 34 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago (2 children)

You misspelled "insurrectionists"

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 28 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Wouldn't it be easier to remove you from the car while being car jacked if your seatbelt is off? Should keep it on so any thieves can't just pull you out. 🤷‍♂️

[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 18 points 1 week ago

I assume its code for making it easier to reach over to the glove box, where his gun is.

[–] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I actually did this to my friend who refused to wear seat belt who also didnt lock her car. I just ran up while she was on phone and pulled her 100lbs self out. Learned her lesson right there. BTW she had several stalkers so I scared the crap out her but that was the point. If I can do easily its over if someone who wanted to hurt her tried.

[–] KeenFlame@feddit.nu 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If i was a stalker that would have been successful. Which was the point.

[–] KeenFlame@feddit.nu 1 points 1 day ago

Kidnapper? Stalkers are something else

[–] LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world -2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

How weirdly controlling and abusive of you.

[–] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Trying to get your friend to lock doors and wear a seat belt regularly? Particularly when she is also concerned about ppl hurting her?

I guess I should have just said my piece and just let the dice fall wherever.

[–] LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That first paragraph is you admitting it is about control.

Yes, that's how bodily autonomy works - you say your piece and let people do what they want with their own body. She literally could have had you arrested and charged with assault, maybe battery depending on her injuries. You don't get to grab others with your no no grabby hands. Didn't you learn that in preschool?

[–] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Yeah I guess she could have if I was wasn't the person she called to come over when she was scared at night and wasn't her flatmate for a year before this event. At the time she was a sister to me and my SO and watching her not listen to basic safety was frustrating. If she wasn't, I would have sat back and let fate take its course.

I respect your perspective but in this case for me anyway its better to try something than a event happening and regretting I could have tried harder to prevent this and didnt.

[–] LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

Codependency isn't an excuse to assault someone.

I don't hurt my sisters. "Like a sister" - you attacked her. Not only could you be charged with a crime, she also could completely reasonably use legal lethal force against you in that scenario in many states. FYI most killers are known to their victims beforehand, so that you know her actually makes you more likely to kill her compared to a stranger.

You just don't want to let go of abusing others so you are making excuses.

[–] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Hardly consider it codependency. Unless all close bonds are considered that. Which is why me doing it was not an issue but if someone else did yeah it would have been.

Like if my mom cut a lock of my hair would I be annoyed and kick her in the shin? sure. I would demand a explaination but not go nuclear. Some person I barely know? Hell to pay.

what's important is the view the people involved have here. I doubt if I apologized today it would be accepted because no one involved view it as a problem.

[–] LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

if I was wasn’t the person she called to come over when she was scared at night and wasn’t her flatmate for a year before this event. At the time she was a sister to me and my SO and watching her not listen to basic safety was frustrating.

This is you describing codependency. This is not typical of all relationships, just codependent ones.

You wanted her to be scared of you. Not all men, but you. And if she's scared of you, you think she will be under your control. Because you think it's okay for men to seize bodily autonomy from women. I'm going to guess you have stupid ideas about child support, abortion, and marriage too.

What you're saying is in "Why Does He Do That?" By Lundy Bancroft. Nothing new, nothing interesting, just justifications for why you give yourself permission to harm others.

Being familiar to her makes you MORE likely to abuse her, which is exactly what you did. Again, legally, you could be arrested for assault, battery, and possibly she could've legally killed you (if you had done that to me, you would be dead immediately FYI). That's how clear the law is that what you did was wrong - you could have died over this and no one would've been on your side.

[–] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I didn't want her to be scared of me. I wanted to prove how easy it was done. She was laughing after when it was all said and done. Frankly if she did deck me I would have been proud but thats not the point. Doing something illegal and unsafe plus the added danger of ppl actively around. Thats suicidal. She didnt see it that way until then. Like how does someone not wear a seatbelt??? If they dont see the danger? show them. If someone is doing something unsafe you?stop them. Thats friendship. To me its was the same as i wrestle pills from my brother in the middle of the night. Don't let ppl you care about make decision that may not come back from.

Highly irrelevant. Unless you think crazy ideas are being pro-choice wanting women to be able to be divorced, arm themselves, and being career oriented. My opinion is Suppressing half the population is madness and a waste. Just like how much it would be a waste if something happens thanks to her naivety.

Deck you? She could have shot you or had you arrested. You illegally assaulted her. Period.

I 100% understand you never learned to keep your hands to yourself due to shitty parents and your own belief system.

[–] FlordaMan@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago

Natural selection

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 24 points 1 week ago

Shhh. Just let this one go, man.

[–] jontree255@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago

All of these GOP tough guys are such fragile pathetic babies.

[–] CompostMaterial@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago

In this case, nothing of value would be lost if he did a quick eject out the front window.

[–] Hayduke@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago

Sound like this will work itself out.

[–] pc486@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 week ago

File this one under fuck around. We'll refile under find out later.

[–] ABetterTomorrow@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 week ago

Would suck if there was a reason for him to slam on his brakes…. Like Luigi dropping a banana

[–] stoly@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

I mean, you didn't need to say more than "Oklahoma Senator" for me to know that he was an idiot, but the rest confirmed it. If you're so scared, go back to OKC.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 1 week ago

The best part is how this would absolutely work if I was getting pulled over for not wearing a seatbelt. /s

[–] FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.cafe 11 points 1 week ago

Why are we giving this attention. Clearly it’s just a dumb statement meant to get shared around and enforce the myth that DC is run by gangs.

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 9 points 1 week ago

Future winner of a Darwin Award.

[–] 9point6@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Let's pretend this man is not a disingenuous moron for a second:

Maybe this is just my country, but cars generally lock from the outside soon after they start accelerating from parked and have done so for at least a decade

How is car jacking even possible given that?

[–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 week ago

most car doors are easily defeated by a car jacker so long as the car jacker has elbows to use for breaking the window. the reason your doors lock when you start moving has more to do with that statistics show that locked doors are less likely to pop open in a collision, leading to more effective crumple zones. many cars that lock above 10 mph automatically also automatically unlock when stopped. i've always felt the old school solution of "car goes into drive, doors lock" was fine and that all these automatic systems add unnecessary complexity.

[–] Thedogdrinkscoffee@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Is your window bulletproof?

[–] 9point6@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

We don't really have guns, so I've never needed to worry about that

[–] Thedogdrinkscoffee@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 week ago

Are you a carjacker?

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 9 points 1 week ago

He's a Republican. For all things, he doesn't understand and/or doesn't care.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 week ago

I feel awful for first responders who have to witness the aftermath of people deciding not to wear safety gear, especially seatbelts.

[–] WhoIsTheDrizzle@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Makes sense. More conditioning to take anecdotal evidence over statistical.

[–] BussyGyatt@feddit.org 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

my bad maths says thats a 900x increased probability from the average of this guy being splattered against the pavement as compared to the next guy so i got some satisfaction out of that. no, don't correct me. anyway whats the bet he actually drives himself around

[–] Cocopanda@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Scared white people are the worse. Just tell people you’re a baby back bitch already.

[–] JigglySackles@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

This man does not understand mathematics!!!!

And let's keep it that way. If he is to learn it must be the hard way. I suggest finding bad drivers to cross paths with him regularly.