[bscphil]

> Purely from a safety standpoint, outright prohibiting bicycle traffic on motorized roads would be a massive improvement at the expense of inconveniencing a small minority of people (while improving the convenience for everyone else).

To me this sounds like the equivalent of permanently shutting down a public park because it's infested with disease carrying rats rather than trying to get rid of the rats.

[philwelch]

You’re comparing motorists (who are the vast majority of US road users) to rats needing to be exterminated.

[bscphil]

No, I'm comparing America's car culture to a rat infestation; something that causes serious problems and is a problem in its own right. This has nothing to do with the moral standing of individuals drivers...

[philwelch]

Which is a ludicrous, fringe viewpoint that verges on trolling when you go out of your way to bring it up in a discussion about safety barriers for motorways.

[aiisjustanif]

Your creating safety barriers for another problem though which are car speeds that aren’t regulated enough, and human and vehicle errors.

[hoseja]

It's correct nonetheless.

[yarky]

> would be a massive improvement at the expense of inconveniencing a small minority of people (while improving the convenience for everyone else).

Wasn't this the same kind of argument we used in the past to justify slavery?

[philwelch]

Slaveholders were a minority of the population who managed to structure all of society to suit their wishes to the detriment of everyone else. As you might have gathered, I’m opposed to this sort of thing.

[Silhouette]

As you might have gathered, I’m opposed to this sort of thing.

In that case perhaps we could compare the number of drivers in the United States with the global population and then talk about the environment? The US is a major contributor to global climate change and the US is exceptionally bad compared to other developed nations in GHG contributions arising directly from motor vehicle use. I'm not interested in contrived arguments about slavery but if you want to take a principled stand against a small minority forcing their preferences and the adverse consequences of those preferences on a much larger majority then unfortunately you are on the wrong side of this issue.