You’re right, it isn’t feasible to always use a bus, thats why walking, cycling, trams, and light rail should also be used. The biggest problem is density. Low density makes it very difficult to effeciently service, yet many north american zoning and building codes make it very difficult to build any housing that isn’t detached single family homes with minimum parking standards and set backs.
No. There are many more disabilities that prevent operation of a car compared to train or tram, so the status quo of car supremacy is far more ableist.
@Cypher@Hawke So if you were to lose your vision or develop epilepsy tomorrow, you would prefer to be dependent on family, friends, or personal servants to drive you everywhere rather than having options of accessible trains and buses and being able to walk to nearby destinations safely?
Many trams and light rail are accessible for various disabilities.
Cars are also restrictive to people with certain disabilities. The fairest way is having a wide variety of options available, including specialized cars for those who need them. Currently, the car is pretty much the only option in many north american cities, which certainly isn’t the fairest.
I’m pretty sure people aren’t ignoring cars as an option - the topic of discussion is excessive prevalence of cars, so the discussion is focused on the viability of alternatives.
You’re right, it isn’t feasible to always use a bus, thats why walking, cycling, trams, and light rail should also be used. The biggest problem is density. Low density makes it very difficult to effeciently service, yet many north american zoning and building codes make it very difficult to build any housing that isn’t detached single family homes with minimum parking standards and set backs.
She’s afraid to be out alone at night. Biking infra isn’t going to change her mind.
Ableism much? These options don’t suit a bunch of people.
No. There are many more disabilities that prevent operation of a car compared to train or tram, so the status quo of car supremacy is far more ableist.
No one said the individual being accommodated had to be the one operating the vehicle.
@Cypher @Hawke So if you were to lose your vision or develop epilepsy tomorrow, you would prefer to be dependent on family, friends, or personal servants to drive you everywhere rather than having options of accessible trains and buses and being able to walk to nearby destinations safely?
Not at all. I’m 100% onboard (pun intended) with trains and buses and trams.
Not sure where you got the idea that I wasn’t.
I would absolutely prefer a private chauffeur given that I find the general public to be imbecilic disgusting wastes of time and oxygen.
Advocates against ablism then calls the general public imbecilic disgusting wastes of oxygen…
Many trams and light rail are accessible for various disabilities.
Cars are also restrictive to people with certain disabilities. The fairest way is having a wide variety of options available, including specialized cars for those who need them. Currently, the car is pretty much the only option in many north american cities, which certainly isn’t the fairest.
Options are good, ignoring the car as an option is ridiculous.
I’m pretty sure people aren’t ignoring cars as an option - the topic of discussion is excessive prevalence of cars, so the discussion is focused on the viability of alternatives.