this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2025
189 points (97.5% liked)

Fuck Cars

13465 readers
92 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 CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon'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 topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo 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:

Recommended communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 month ago (4 children)

They also said that adoption of electric vehicles, which emit less waste heat than conventional cars, and make sure these new cars are built with light, heat-reflecting paints at the vehicle design stage.

This like a "more guns" solution to gun violence... except, applied to cars.

[–] Dholi@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That's some crazy mental gymnastics to not say "We need more public transit to get cars off the road".

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 month ago

It really is. If the default is "everyone must have a car to go anywhere", then there will be no solutions that actually work for the betterment of the environment or society.

[–] huppakee@feddit.nl 5 points 1 month ago

Not more, just better. I am yet to see a better gun, but in this case I would argue these measures could result in a better car. Although an ev with reflective paint wouldn't be as helpful in combatting the heat island effect as a public transport vehicle with the same reflective paint, considering that would leave a lot more space for greenery.

[–] Gladaed@feddit.org 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Not really. This reduces unwanted impact while preserving intended function. Heating by light Absorption is not an intended impact of cars.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 month ago

Heating by light Absorption is not an intended impact of cars.

Neither are the tens of thousands of fatalities per year.

It doesn't matter what the intention is, if the end result is still a massive loss for our communities.

It's often been said that if the side-effects of medication outweigh the benefits, then you probably shouldn't be using it. Same should apply for most things, especially multi-ton vehicles, which only claim to offer "convenience" as the number one benefit.

[–] dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 month ago

A more low caliber guns solution to gun violence.

“A .22 is barely lethal, this will lower the fatality rate of mass shootings.”