DudeImMacGyver

Looking at their rules for it, it actually seems kinda fucked: One bad choice years ago bars you for life unless you are wealthy enough to go through their process and hire lawyers, it's a even crime to try and enter, but that is definitely not a widely known fact, so even though someone might have paid their dues and even been completely sober for years, they're still fucked unless they're well off.

I get wanting to protect people and stop dangerous driving but effectively banning someone for life if they made a mistake and happen to be poor seems a bit unfair. You can bet your ass rich people have all sorts of ways around this that completely circumvent the system anyhow on top of all that.

As usual, it's another regulation that disproportionately affects poor people who are unable to afford proper legal representation to begin with (and are more likely to be falsely convicted of a DUI in the first place).

[AI slop reporting intensifies]

"It's slime time!"

-Beverly probably

Why is this here?

What a piece of shit.

Nonsense, just replace sleep with MORE COFFEE!

1 or 2 lanes of traffic is not what I am referring to. 2 is plenty, the solution isn't MoAr RoADs, it's LESS GOD DAMN CARS! People don't need their car to travel all the time but you try to tell them that and they lose their fucking minds. It's goddamn infuriating and if you don't believe me go read through the responses.

Even your response is tainted by that logic, it's not true: We as a society do not need nor should we have to rely upon cars for everything we do. If we don't change this, we are consigning ourselves and our children to a horrible future. Very few people seem to actually give a fuck though. This shit needs to change, but it won't because of entitled people unwilling to change.

Are you one of them?

Yeah, no that's not how this shit works and I'm tired of debating carbrains on their carbrained horseshit so you go ahead and believe whatever the fuck you like I guess. 3+ lanes for traffic inside the city is fucking gross and insane.

I can see why you might think so, but counterintuitively, it's simply not true. It doesn't help and it makes the areas where they're built shittier to exist in. The continual widening of roads is a bad idea. A lane or two is sufficient. The rest of the expansion should be for footpaths, bike paths, and rail, period. This has been proven repeatedly to be the most effective setup for getting people around and maintaining a good quality of life.

Just to forewarn you: The above is an established proven fact that's played out repeatedly for better and worse depending on which way the city went. Ignoring that reality will open you up to ridicule so I'd encourage you to actually take time to consider the above fact. On top if not helping at all and making everything worse, it also takes up a fuckton of space and costs a crazy amount of resources to maintain.

If you're skeptical that's fine, go learn about it, but don't give a knee-jerk carbrain reaction because that just makes you look like a fool. Check out Paris, France if you want to look for a recent example of changing to a more effective transportation infrastructure. Check out Hyperbad, India if you want some urban hell nightmare fuel.

Not how roads work, dumbfuck.

Ultrawide roads do not help congestion and never have, that's a fact.

You can disagree with a fact, but that will just make you a dumb fuck, you god damn stupid-ass dumbfuck.

I invite these 9 dumbfucks to eat all of my shit and hair.

Coffee is fine.

Fuck romanticizing "the grind".