If you really really need that carlike range, which most people, even in amerikkka, don't, get a motorcycle. Otherwise, get a bike or one of the dozens of different kinds of electric contraptions which don't involve bringing thousands of pounds of metal everywhere you go. Defending the use of cars should be treated here exactly the same as defending carnism.
3 months a year the roads here are deadly icy most days. So to go 20 miles to my workplace down the icy motorway (no bike path) should I crash and die on a motorbike or get crushed on a bicycle?
Not to mention that the cheapest used motorbike I can buy here is about 3x the cost of the cheapest used car, I quite literally couldn't afford one.
A motorcycle striking a pedestrian at 50mph is practically just as deadly as a car doing the same thing.
Cars are not inherently dangerous modes of transport. Poor road design e.g. stroads, lack of separate bike lanes, and super wide lanes without traffic calming measures, are all more important factors than the actual vehicle being used for transport.
A bus would easily kill a pedestrian, but per passenger (assuming moderate occupancy) is far more efficient and better for the environment compared with each person riding a motorcycle. This doesn’t even consider why someone might ride a bus, for example disability, which prevents them from riding a motorcycle or a bicycle.
Many many European cities have very low risk of injury or death to cars because the cities are designed much better. Cars are second class citizens in urban centers. This is what you should be fighting for, not focusing arbitrarily on a particular vehicle which is a symptom of a deeper issue.
: https://x.com/UKLabour/status/1800249657018458443
If you really really need that carlike range, which most people, even in amerikkka, don't, get a motorcycle. Otherwise, get a bike or one of the dozens of different kinds of electric contraptions which don't involve bringing thousands of pounds of metal everywhere you go. Defending the use of cars should be treated here exactly the same as defending carnism.
deleted by creator
3 months a year the roads here are deadly icy most days. So to go 20 miles to my workplace down the icy motorway (no bike path) should I crash and die on a motorbike or get crushed on a bicycle?
Not to mention that the cheapest used motorbike I can buy here is about 3x the cost of the cheapest used car, I quite literally couldn't afford one.
Removed by mod
A motorcycle striking a pedestrian at 50mph is practically just as deadly as a car doing the same thing.
Cars are not inherently dangerous modes of transport. Poor road design e.g. stroads, lack of separate bike lanes, and super wide lanes without traffic calming measures, are all more important factors than the actual vehicle being used for transport.
A bus would easily kill a pedestrian, but per passenger (assuming moderate occupancy) is far more efficient and better for the environment compared with each person riding a motorcycle. This doesn’t even consider why someone might ride a bus, for example disability, which prevents them from riding a motorcycle or a bicycle.
Many many European cities have very low risk of injury or death to cars because the cities are designed much better. Cars are second class citizens in urban centers. This is what you should be fighting for, not focusing arbitrarily on a particular vehicle which is a symptom of a deeper issue.
Not just that but assuming everyone can just ride a motorcycle is ableist as fuck.
And I say this as someone that grew up riding motorcycles.
You are completely out of touch. Not one person I know lives within biking distance of their workplace.