555
submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by jakob@lemmy.schuerz.at to c/fuck_cars@lemmy.ml

All these children are invisible to the driver...

Fuck all those cars!!! Put them away to hell, not to earth. They are too big for all - except for small egos. But for small egos is therapy much better.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] dingus@lemmy.ml 169 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Or we could, you know, follow previously established methods of building vehicles that make pedestrian death and dismemberment less likely.

No, no, no. Americans need them this way apparently for some inexplicable fucking reason.

So instead of just designing them with pedestrian safety in mind to begin with, we are just gonna slap on more fucking band-aids (like cameras) that do fuck-all.

[-] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 60 points 11 months ago

Americans never asked for this, it's the classification system for light trucks implemented following the Yom Kippur War that left too much leeway in the definition for "light trucks" that has been driving auto makers in this direction.

Of course there have been knock-on cultural issues where certain people make it part of their ego and the market effect becomes self reinforcing, but that's how we got into this mess. History is a series of unintended consequences, again.

[-] dingus@lemmy.ml 32 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Agreed. The industry is invested in avoiding regulation that could impede their profits at all costs. This means they will invest in advertising pushing the idea that these vehicles are needed.

[-] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 19 points 11 months ago

It's almost like our enemies are rich people! Crazy thought, right?

[-] CoderKat@lemm.ee 8 points 11 months ago

I'd argue that they have asked for trucks to get so big because they seemingly sell better that way. It's admittedly an imperfect thing to look at since there's few alternatives and many other factors, but these big trucks didn't immediately take over the market. At some point they were introduced and consumers liked them.

[-] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

This is why I said it became an ego thing. Automakers didn't set out to kill the most kids possible and ask "how do we design towards that", they exploited a regulatory loophole which then cracked open a wider market niche based on people's egocentrism, brutality, and myopic attitudes toward transit (e.g. carbrain).

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] amanneedsamaid@sopuli.xyz 32 points 11 months ago
[-] Tedrow@lemmy.world 40 points 11 months ago

That truck isn't even lifted. Looks like stock.

[-] dingus@lemmy.ml 46 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Yeah, more like "Ban trucks that are built so high off the ground that they can't see pedestrians." That would easily include lifted trucks as well as general monstrosities.

I mean, it's not like any of these motherfuckers uses these things to haul anything other than their kids and fucking groceries anyway.

Too much of a pussy to just own it and just drive a fucking minivan, which can easily carry kids and groceries. Has to buy the big dick extender instead.

[-] LanternEverywhere@kbin.social 31 points 11 months ago

But it's even worse than that. The front of the car being so big and high is PURELY aesthetics. All of the machinery that's in current trucks would just as easily fit under a hood that was lower and sloped downward for better visibility, but trucks with a high squared off hood and grille sell more because many truck buyers care more about it having a tough appearance rather then it being an actually better vehicle.

[-] Neato@kbin.social 9 points 11 months ago

They use them to haul their over-inflated self worth.

[-] BlinkerFluid@lemmy.one 3 points 11 months ago

Yes, no one who owns a truck uses it to move furniture, trash, dirt, mulch, or an old transmission they pulled at the auto lot. None of them go fishing or hunting, obviously, so fishing rods, camping gear and coolers won't be necessary in the back. Also, no one who owns a truck has ever done home repair and would never carry wood or power tools in the back of, do you get how stupid your strawman is yet?

[-] dingus@lemmy.ml 33 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

https://www.axios.com/ford-pickup-trucks-history

I guess self-reporting surveys must be lies then.

In other words, for the most part, these gas guzzling monstrosities are rarely used for hauling shit. Maybe they should just rent a truck when they need one?

[-] BlinkerFluid@lemmy.one 1 points 11 months ago

That doesn't invalidate trucks used for commercial or professional use, or the fact I'll still stand on.... hauling and outdoor use. It being rare doesn't make it non-existent.

I'm sure some idiot is hauling refrigerators with a Civic, it doesn't make them progressive.

[-] dingus@lemmy.ml 19 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It's not non-existent, but it's non-existent enough to justify most people not owning trucks and just renting them when needed.

I mean, if trucks were still like the 4-cylinder Ranger I had from the 80's, it would make more sense. But they aren't and it doesn't.

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] Neato@kbin.social 12 points 11 months ago

That doesn’t invalidate trucks used for commercial or professional use

In that case they need a commercial license and/or it's business property for taxes and the company should own it (if not a sole proprietorship). And you can't use company property for personal use most places.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Neato@kbin.social 16 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Almost no one uses trucks daily for those activities. It's an occasional thing. In which case renting is cheaper. Hunting, too since the vast, vast majority of hunters aren't even hunting weekly.

Fishing? Collapsible poles or strap them to the top. It's not like the rest of the world has trucks and they do these things.

Also, coolers and camping gear? My brother in gaia get a hatchback.

[-] blazera@kbin.social 10 points 11 months ago

We came up with trailers long ago for occassional hauling needs. Not that any of your needs even warrant one.

[-] MigratingApe@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 11 months ago

We don’t have this kind of trucks in the Europe AT ALL and people still go fishing, do home repairs, carry heavy or large loads. This is all American lifestyle.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 months ago

I fish with a Camry just fine.

[-] BigNote@lemm.ee 3 points 11 months ago

I can easily do all of that and more with my non-lifted mid-sized long-bed pickup. It's just a fact my dude; they are selling a self-image, not actual utility. Or what about a van with a roof-rack. In my professional experience that's a lot more utilitarian if you're a tradesman.

Again, it's all about an image that's been meticulously and brilliantly marketed and sold to very specific demographics.

[-] BeakersBunsen@lemmy.zip 3 points 11 months ago

Don't impede the circle jerk, unless you use it everyday for work you should rent a truck every other weekend

[-] BigNote@lemm.ee 3 points 11 months ago

I work in industrial construction on massive unionized projects with tradespeople coming from all over the US and Canada and I can tell you for an objective fact that the number of guys --it's almost always guys, which should tell you something-- who drive giant lifted obnoxious trucks as their daily driver vs the number who actually really and truly need them on a regular basis is like 100 to 1.

But even if it were only 10 to 1, that means we have 10 times as many of these giant gas guzzling dangerous trucks out on the road.

The industry has done such a good job at selling these trucks as part of a self-image, that a lot of guys are incapable of admitting that the only reason they drive one is because they think it looks cool.

[-] BlinkerFluid@lemmy.one 2 points 11 months ago

Or just... have a truck? Look, man. Is your problem intensified by the trucks in question being 8-cylinder gas guzzlers?

Have you ever heard of Toyota?

[-] dingus@lemmy.ml 7 points 11 months ago

Carbrained: When you're so stuck up your own ass you even lash out at people who were obviously making a joke that meant they agreed with you.

[-] BlinkerFluid@lemmy.one 2 points 11 months ago

That's it. I've had enough of this. I'm off to buy a truck!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] HurlingDurling@lemm.ee 12 points 11 months ago

Car manufacturers have been making trucks taller and boxier because their studies show that their owners do that to their trucks after buying them so they want to be more appealing to the average pickup truck buyer... and yes that thought makes my brain hurt

[-] BingoBangoBongo@midwest.social 4 points 11 months ago

Definitely stock cause it doesn't even look leveled, and no one lifts without leveling.

[-] Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

no one lifts without leveling.

Can I introduce you to the world of hack job block kits prolific in rural Canada?

[-] Retro_Unlimited@infosec.pub 30 points 11 months ago

I saw a YouTube explaining the giant cars in the US have to do with the government making a big equation that car manufacturers have to follow.

The equation calculated the weight, size, gas mileage, etc, and the only way they can make the cars pass the equation is to make them giant. The equation backfired and now we have giant cars.

[-] explodicle@local106.com 26 points 11 months ago

It didn't backfire. They designed a law that looks good at first glance but actually makes auto manufacturers richer. This happens all the time and it's on purpose, because they know voters don't have the analysis resources of lobbyists.

[-] Mitchie151@lemmy.world 13 points 11 months ago

Yep, the manufacturers get massive tax breaks on this class of vehicle, which means they can make and sell them at the same or better price than a small, fuel efficient car. If a family with kids has to choose between a mid size crossover or an F150 at similar price points, why would you get the crossover? The USA needs to fix the way it taxes cars to disincentivise these fuel inefficient giant cars. No other country has these problems so it's not a selfish person problem, it's an entirely logical choice to make given the circumstances.

[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 4 points 11 months ago

If Americans had to pay the same petrol taxes that Europeans do, they'd soon go for the tiny cars.

[-] grimace1153@lemm.ee 3 points 11 months ago

“Ban stuff I don’t like”

[-] dingus@lemmy.ml 30 points 11 months ago

Yeah, it's totally just stuff I don't like!

https://www.nbc.com/today/video/inside-the-latest-push-for-front-end-cameras-in-new-cars/NBCN346245869

It's not like there's any evidence whatsoever these giant pieces of shit are more dangerous. The referenced news story definitely doesn't talk about the science behind why they're more dangerous. It's just people don't like it! /s

Could you be any more disingenuous?

[-] DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 11 months ago

Found the emotional support vehicle user

[-] explodicle@local106.com 8 points 11 months ago

"Interpret everything in bad faith"

[-] Steeve@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Band-aids like cameras that do fuck all? Cameras are a very quick, simple, and obvious solution to this specific problem. There's a reason that all new cars have backup cameras nowadays. Perfection is the enemy of good and all that.

[-] max@feddit.nl 14 points 11 months ago

Eh. European panel vans can usuallly haul more and have better visibility. Just droop the snoot.

this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2023
555 points (100.0% liked)

Fuck Cars

9675 readers
89 users here now

This community exists as a sister community/copycat community to the r/fuckcars subreddit.

This community exists for the following reasons:

You can find the Matrix chat room for this community here.

Rules

  1. Be nice to each other. Being aggressive or inflammatory towards other users will get you banned. Name calling or obvious trolling falls under that. Hate cars, hate the system, but not people. While some drivers definitely deserve some hate, most of them didn't choose car-centric life out of free will.

  2. No bigotry or hate. Racism, transphobia, misogyny, ableism, homophobia, chauvinism, fat-shaming, body-shaming, stigmatization of people experiencing homeless or substance users, etc. are not tolerated. Don't use slurs. You can laugh at someone's fragile masculinity without associating it with their body. The correlation between car-culture and body weight is not an excuse for fat-shaming.

  3. Stay on-topic. Submissions should be on-topic to the externalities of car culture in urban development and communities globally. Posting about alternatives to cars and car culture is fine. Don't post literal car fucking.

  4. No traffic violence. Do not post depictions of traffic violence. NSFW or NSFL posts are not allowed. Gawking at crashes is not allowed. Be respectful to people who are a victim of traffic violence or otherwise traumatized by it. News articles about crashes and statistics about traffic violence are allowed. Glorifying traffic violence will get you banned.

  5. No reposts. Before sharing, check if your post isn't a repost. Reposts that add something new are fine. Reposts that are sharing content from somewhere else are fine too.

  6. No misinformation. Masks and vaccines save lives during a pandemic, climate change is real and anthropogenic - and denial of these and other established facts will get you banned. False or highly speculative titles will get your post deleted.

  7. No harassment. Posts that (may) cause harassment, dogpiling or brigading, intentionally or not, will be removed. Please do not post screenshots containing uncensored usernames. Actual harassment, dogpiling or brigading is a bannable offence.

Please report posts and comments that violate our rules.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS