• maegul (he/they)@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    A strong but older example of this is driving crimes. For a while killing someone while driving was just prosecuted as manslaughter (accidental killing), cuz that’s what it is. But juries weren’t convicting very often.

    Someone realised that people didn’t like the idea that you could commit manslaughter, a very serious crime, just be driving your car and making a mistake. And so a new crime was created called reckless driving or something similar. It had a similar jail time but different terminology. And it got juries convicting more.

    Clearly people have for a long time preferred to not think about just how absurdly violent or dangerous the act of driving is, to the point that killing with a car just didn’t count as a normal killing crime.

    this will vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction of course.

    • Jimmycrackcrack@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Ah is that why there seemed to be this thing called Vehicular Manslaughter in American TV shows? I don’t know if we have that here in Australia but I always wondered why such a thing existed since surely it was just… manslaughter whether a vehicle was involved or not.

      • maegul (he/they)@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        8 months ago

        yep! I’m not sure how much it’s common knowledge, but I heard it from a lawyer/legal-academic in a non-public forum, so I trust it. It wouldn’t be too hard to dig into the history of it though.

  • Boozilla@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Tailgating comes to mind. It’s not that different than pointing a gun at someone, and people do it constantly.

    • space@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      8 months ago

      There are a lot of things people do while driving that are dangerous but very common. Things like driving with the high beam, speeding, tailgating, using a phone while driving etc.

      The problem is that enforcing the rules is hard. You would either need a large percentage of the population to be police officers, or to put traffic cameras on every street.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    8 months ago

    I do find myself caught in that. Particularly if I’m stuck in traffic for no readily apparent reason.

    “All I’m saying is ‘it better be an accident’ and ‘somebody better be dead!’”

    I wouldn’t think that outside being stuck in traffic.

  • SpeedLimit55@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    I would love to drive less but it would take me 8X longer to ride a bus to work. I also can’t ride my bike due to fear of death by car.

    • ezchili@iusearchlinux.fyi
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      you’re forced to drive in a place that’s designed to force you to drive

      It’s not a failure of the alternative modes of transport

      You just need to redesign the place

  • M500@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    8 months ago

    The study seems a little bs.

    They ask questions like, should a person smoke in public? And then ask if car fumes are a problem to the public.

    Well they are not really comparable, like you don’t need to smoke and you can smoke elsewhere. I literally need to drive to work and can’t just drive through a forest.

    They also ask about personal property being left in the street and stolen. People said that if someone leaves their stuff in the street and it’s stolen, then it’s their fault. But when it switched to cars, it was suddenly not their fault.

    Well where else can I leave my car? If I leave my iPhone in the street, that’s a bit different.

    I’m in the boat of people who wish that we did not need cars, but sadly my city is nowhere close to having a decent public transport.

    • vividspecter@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      You can be forced to do something while still being aware of the issues. Your interpretation seems to be: I can’t change it therefore it makes sense to mentally ignore it. But being forced to drive while being aware that car fumes are toxic to health aren’t mutually exclusive positions.

      • AJ Sadauskas@aus.social
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        @vividspecter @M500 It’s also important to note that there’s a huge difference between a social critique and a personal insult.

        The lack of viable transport alternatives is a systemic issue. It’s not a personal moral failure.

        It is not a personal moral fault to drive where no good alternatives exist.

        The solution is not a different personal transport choice. The solution is systemic change to how transport, infrastructure, and planning are delivered.

        The survey looks at how people have been socially conditioned to accept the systemic issues.

        It involves a lot of blame shifting, and victim blaming.

        It involves dropping or changing a number of socially accepted rights and wrongs as soon as a car is involved.

    • Not_mikey@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      Your still viewing things from a motor normative lense with statements like I need to drive to get to work and I need to park my car. This sort of thinking naturalizes things that are actually part of a system that can change if we decide to. We can collectively decide to ban cars and humanity could continue to thrive, there’s nothing necessary about cars. They may be personally necessary in the current system, but the system itself isn’t, and this is critiquing the system not individual decisions.

      The point of critical theory like this is to look at things we take for granted or think are necessary, show that they actually aren’t natural or necessary, and expose some of the problems we ignore because we think the problem is required to live.

      You have to step outside the system and look at it like you don’t come from car centric culture and with the knowledge that it’s a choice and not necessary. From that point of view questions like why is it ok to spew toxic fumes in a populated area? Makes sense since you know the system is a societal choice, not just the way things have to be.

      With that knowledge you can try and change the system. That doesn’t mean never driving, because it may be necessary to live, but driving less and taking public transit when you can and advocating and supporting public transit and biking infrastructure over car infrastructure.

      • doingthestuff@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        8 months ago

        You seem to have no idea that there are places with zero options aside from cars right now. I live in such a place. You criticized the statement “I need to drive my car and I need to park it.” I do advocate for better but there are no legitimate qualifiers to that statement. I still need to. Period.

        • Not_mikey@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          8 months ago

          You seemed to have missed the part where I said

          They may be personally necessary in the current system, but the system itself isn’t necessary, and this is critiquing the system.

          You may need to drive because the system forces you to do so to live. But that system that forces you to drive isn’t necessary and we can work to change it. If you are working to change that than good. If you dismiss problems with the current system by naturalizing it with unqualified statements like “I need to …” Then that’s a problem, you should instead say “I’m forced to…”

          Like if the government is restricting your speech statements like “I need to not criticize the government” makes that seem unchangeable and just the way things are, if you say " I’m forced to not criticize the government" or qualify it with “I need to not criticize the government because it’s repressive” then that shows there’s nothing natural about it and that some system is preventing you from doing something, not nature. Then you can recognize the system can change and work towards changing the system, instead of accepting it and moving on.

          • doingthestuff@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            8 months ago

            Not if you can’t afford to move. And other people would still live there even if you could. So I’m just advocating and it’s slowly working.

    • Venator@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      They also ask about personal property being left in the street and stolen. People said that if someone leaves their stuff in the street and it’s stolen, then it’s their fault. But when it switched to cars, it was suddenly not their fault.

      If they’d asked a question about a bike locked up to a bike rack that would probably be more equivalent. I think if they’d asked if you left your car unlocked with the keys in thr ignition then people would say that’s your own fault if the car gets stolen too…

  • Nath@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    8 months ago

    I’m doing my part! I just got my February timeline this morning. I’m actually a bit annoyed with it - I’m pretty sure most of my “driving” km here should have been “transit”. But how is Google supposed to know if I’m on a bus or in a car?

    • mondoman712@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      If you care enough to, you can go through day by day and change the activities at each time.

  • Another Catgirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    today I was on my daily commute, the first 15 minutes are through dense urbanish suburbs and the last 12 minutes are on a highway. Waiting behind a garbage truck and a school bus interacting with the sides of the road.

    I thought “I don’t belong here… no, my car doesn’t belong here. Would be much easier to bike from my house to the parking lot near the highway and drive the rest of the way. Would cut down on time wasted waiting in this congested traffic.”