994
The bridge is an orange-pilled urbanist
(slrpnk.net)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2024
994 points (97.6% liked)
Fuck Cars
9372 readers
638 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 Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don'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 topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do 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:
- [meta] for discussions/suggestions about this community itself
- [article] for news articles
- [blog] for any blog-style content
- [video] for video resources
- [academic] for academic studies and sources
- [discussion] for text post questions, rants, and/or discussions
- [meme] for memes
- [image] for any non-meme images
- [misc] for anything that doesn’t fall cleanly into any of the other categories
Recommended communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
The driver deserves criminal punishment in addition to the punishment of ignoring physics.
Would this be a criminal offense? As much as it’s annoying that his car is so massive, he drove a street legal vehicle in the wrong place. Paying for the damages seems like a sufficient consequence.
Not a lawyer, but I would assume that reckless driving would apply here. If nothing else, he should be liable for the damages financially due to negligence
If it's overweight, it's not street legal.
Street legal*
*not legal on all streets
It was overweight for the bridge, not the road. It was from a commercial trucking company, so likely a dump truck. The first clue should be that it was a F-750. There are pickup beds for them, but they're almost always a flatbed or dump bed.
Street-legal, bridge-legal, who gives a shit. The point is, they drove it illegally and should be able to be punished accordingly. The make and model are irrelevant.
Do you think they wont be if not for this internet rage?
I don't care either way, I was responding to a different person who said they couldn't be punished because it was street-legal but in "the wrong place." I was simply pointing out that street-legal-but-in-the-wrong-place is the same as not-street-legal.
Why do you have such a hard on for punishment? Isn't restitution enough?
I have a hard-on for accurate language, I don't give a shit what happens to the imaginary people in the pickup truck.
He failed to observe a traffic control device. There's at least a ticket in there somewhere for him.
If the bridge had been just a bit sturdier, it could have been damaged jut to the point where the truck could have passed, but the next person driving over would have fell in and risked their lives.
Perhaps the cost of the damage would add up to something they could try to make felonious