I’m also an anarchist but I support traffic laws bc they’re the only “laws” that are actually designed for order and efficiency. Like etiquette. If no one followed them it would be worse for everyone. It’s cooperation put into laws to jail those that create dangerous situations, I don’t think they’re bad in their essence though. You probably know more though cuz you’re an urbanist, I also low key never drove a car LMAO
I’ve honestly never driven a car either lol. I support many traffic laws of course, because they pertain to cars, and keep them in check. Cars aren’t humans, they’re machines. My problem is that many traffic laws move the blame for the harm done by cars to pedestrians, rather than the cars themselves. The whole point of jaywalking was to move the blame onto the pedestrian if they are hit by a car, with the excuse that they aren’t using the proper channels, allowing auto companies to get away with more.
It’s also been shown that environment is generally a better deterrent than any laws ever could be. A narrower road is better at slowing cars than speed bumps, and a thriving city where people see the road as theirs to travel teaches the car that it’s not their road. Even now in many places in the Netherlands (Urbanist try not to mention Netherlands challenge: Impossible) cars traverse the cityscape with a whole lot of caution. So that is to say I disobey traffic laws that are made to make cars feel more comfortable, even when that doesn’t necessarily make things safer.
I hope that made sense, and thank you for reading my hastily thrown together explanation! -
I’m also an anarchist but I support traffic laws bc they’re the only “laws” that are actually designed for order and efficiency. Like etiquette. If no one followed them it would be worse for everyone. It’s cooperation put into laws to jail those that create dangerous situations, I don’t think they’re bad in their essence though. You probably know more though cuz you’re an urbanist, I also low key never drove a car LMAO
I’ve honestly never driven a car either lol. I support many traffic laws of course, because they pertain to cars, and keep them in check. Cars aren’t humans, they’re machines. My problem is that many traffic laws move the blame for the harm done by cars to pedestrians, rather than the cars themselves. The whole point of jaywalking was to move the blame onto the pedestrian if they are hit by a car, with the excuse that they aren’t using the proper channels, allowing auto companies to get away with more.
It’s also been shown that environment is generally a better deterrent than any laws ever could be. A narrower road is better at slowing cars than speed bumps, and a thriving city where people see the road as theirs to travel teaches the car that it’s not their road. Even now in many places in the Netherlands (Urbanist try not to mention Netherlands challenge: Impossible) cars traverse the cityscape with a whole lot of caution. So that is to say I disobey traffic laws that are made to make cars feel more comfortable, even when that doesn’t necessarily make things safer.
I hope that made sense, and thank you for reading my hastily thrown together explanation! -
Thank you, I understand now :)