If someone makes a dangerous product, it is reasonable to expect them to include appropriate safety features to reduce the risk their product poses to society.

The "victims" here aren't the automobile manufacturers, they're the people whose cars got stolen and those who were run over by a reckless joyrider or shot in a drive-by enabled by criminals having easy access to insecure, easy-to-steal vehicles. These are all people who wouldn't have befallen harm if these vehicles had standard anti-theft features.

The reason nobody's talking about suing bike manufacturers is because nobody was stealing bikes and riding around shooting people or crashing through the sides of buildings.

I think there is absolutely a legal argument that anti-theft features are critical safety features in cars, specifically. Not sure whether that argument will hold up in court, but it's not anywhere near as straightforward as "bike manufacturers don't have to care about theft, why should car manufacturers?"

Why does a car manufacturer have to care about theft at all?

This argument doesn't make any sense to me. Why bother with keys and locks then? Is it more practical to expect society to eliminate literally all crime?

I'm sure there are good reasons to dislike this lawsuit, but this isn't one of them.

Man I would love to see Chicago Amtrak get some much needed love.

The way they structure the platforms to force passengers to sit in a waiting room and then line up and get funneled through a single door before they can board is so inefficient and backwards.

Bad design and execution has made the Amtrak just as inconvenient as flying and slower than driving, when it should be the opposite.

This kind of gatekeeping and elitism is bad for Lemmy and for FOSS.

It makes this community a less welcoming place and leaves new folks with a bad first impression. Much better to be welcoming and let people learn/see the benefits of FOSS at their own pace.

I never really had problems with Biagi when I heard her talk, or explain her goals for CDOT, but it was abundantly clear that her department wasn't doing enough to prioritize transit modes other than the car. That's a failure, no matter how you slice it -- either Biagi was less than transparent about her goals/motives regarding pedestrian safety, she fundamentally misunderstood the problems that arise from car-centric design or she was unable to affect significant systemic change in her department.

Here's hoping whoever replaces her is willing to acknowledge de-prioritizing the car-centric transportation model as their #1 priority, and has a clear plan on how to move the city in that direction.