• baguettefish@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      rules aren’t neutral or grown out of the void. people with biases and maybe even ambitions create them for specific purposes

      EDIT: To quote Anatole France: “The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.”

      • FishFace@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Rules governing bike traffic are generally quite reasonable though. It’s not like the enlightened traffic planners in the Netherlands went “you know what, cyclists don’t have to obey red lights” for example. So I’m not seeing the biases you’re talking about, at least in this example.

        Comparing running red lights to sleeping under bridges or steal for survival seems, at best, hyperbolic. In any case I don’t think that quote supports the view that the law is intentionally biased

        • MonkRome@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          The lights often automatically changes to cyclists priority in many places in the Netherlands, and often provide underpasses to avoid conflict points in the first place. It is not a comparable situation. Traffic laws and infrastructure in the USA, for instance, are incredibly biased in favor of cars, so their comment is absolutely relevant.

          When I bike in the USA often the safest time for me to cross an intersection is unrelated to whether I have a green light, but more related to if anyone else at the intersection does. The safest time for me to go is when no one else at the light has a green light, not when I do.