[zolbrek]

I struggle to understand the appeal of walking in the rain and snow and cuddling with strangers on public transport in any year, and that's without bags of groceries. You can walk if you want, everyone should have the right to drivability.

[M1ch431]

Everybody should have access to all modes of transportation that are sustainable and comfortable to them and the people around them. Transportation should be accessible. Period.

Be it high speed rail, car, bus, e-bike, e-scooter, etc. As long as what you are doing is safe, and you're not harming yourself or other people, you should be able to use whatever the hell kind of gadget you want to in order to get to the places you need to go. You shouldn't have police coming up to you telling you what you can and cannot put on the road because the laws are ancient and stagnant - and only get changed if there is a profit incentive.

You shouldn't have to worry about getting run off the road/sidewalk/crosswalk because the people who planned/make the roads think it's a good thing to build thin, one-lane on each side, roads, with no bike lane, with no shoulder or a very small shoulder, with poorly-maintained sidewalks, etc.

We really need to rethink how roads should work, how traffic lights should work, suggest speeds instead of set limits, and update our infrastructure. And standardize, standardize, standardize.

And specifically, here in the US, we need to change to the metric system, like the rest of the world. But that probably will never happen.

[earthling8118]

This precious drivability is what it making it suck everywhere. Including for the drivers. It would be better for all parties involved if it wasn't made to be the only viable method of transportation.

[zolbrek]

I live close to a small city in the Northeast of Germany and driving here is a dream. Nothing like LA. (Which is the city a deleted reply mentioned as an example of cars destroying nice cities. LA's problem is more one of overpopulation, if the population levels were as they were a few decades ago it would be wonderful to live and drive in LA.)

I would like to also mention the blatant disregard of traffic laws by the many cyclists here as an unnecessary burden on motorists. You should be required to take theoretical and practical driving exams no matter the vehicle if you intend to put wheels on the road, otherwise you are a danger to all parties. Helmets on the road should also be required just as it is for bikers.

[powercf]

> blatant disregard of traffic laws by the many cyclists

Enforcement of traffic law for cyclists would be good, but blatant disregard of traffic laws (e.g. running yellow/red lights, not yielding at crossings, stopping on bike paths before roundabouts etc.) by many motorists also exists, and typically is much more dangerous for others than the actions of cyclists (who typically only endanger themselves)

> Helmets on the road should also be required just as it is for bikers

Why? Cyclists don't usually fall off or hit their heads. The costs of mandatory helmets outweigh the benefits.

[zolbrek]

Drivers are definitely more disciplined here because habitual blatant disregard of traffic laws will lead to you quickly losing your license.

Motorists don't usually get into accidents either, it's when exceptions happen that you can be glad to have been wearing a mandated seatbelt.

The cost of a decent helmet is 30-50€. What's the cost of bashing your head against the curb and leaking fluid out of your broken skull?