LovesTha

@perestroika @poVoq it looks like you can make that longer for bike fit, but yes, they have suspension in there which will impact it a little bit. But that shouldn't be a big deal.

@over_clox ah, yes, might makes right.

For reference, when was the street invented? And for what?

@over_clox Yes, the concept is from rail, but it applies to all crossings/intersections.

The point is we lost a lot when we decided that it was okay for death machines to have right of way all around us. We shouldn't accept it as normal.

@over_clox bad typing, corrected now

@over_clox why are cars allowed there. That is the way around I'm pushing

@over_clox at grade crossings should be rare ;)

@over_clox The key bit there being, why are cars allowed on things that were safe for pedestrians?

@lgsp I'm a fan of requiring them over 25kmph. Yes this is largely unenforcable, so no one will be fined. But it still gives the message that if you go fast you should wear one.

But it also gets out of the way of people riding to the corner store for milk

@over_clox @lgsp no, motorised vehicles shouldn't be able to hit pedestrians and cyclists. Mostly because their is a right to walk, not drive a car.

@walden @horse manually creating segments on regular routes is labour, but not too burdensome.

Segments on one off routes don't have much value on a small instance.

I'm interested to see how it works.

@atzanteol @CompactFlax read the article, it is just expanding the current vehicle laws it include cyclists.

So in all likelyhood cyclists will get slaps on the wrist like drivers to.

@limelight79 @versefedi Attempted Manslaughter feels like an oxymoron to me. Attempted requires intent and Manslaughter requires lack of intent?