Edit: to clarify: the message in the ad is actually ironic/satirical, mocking the advice for cyclists to wear high-viz at night.

It uses the same logic but inverts the parts and responsabilities, by suggesting to motorists (not cyclists) to apply bright paint on their cars.

So this ad is not pro or against high-viz, it’s against victim blaming

Cross-posted from: https://mastodon.uno/users/rivoluzioneurbanamobilita/statuses/113544508246569296

  • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 hours ago

    It’s not insane, even if it’s an unfamiliar concept. @invalid_name@lemm.ee is advocating for what is basically the legal concept known as strict liability. It means that a person is held liable for the consequences of an action, even in the absence of negligence or intent. American courts have applied it to things like crop dusting, or use of explosives, but this exact scenario is the law in the Netherlands. A driver hitting a bicyclist there is strictly liable for at least half of the damages in all unintentional crashes. (That is, when the driver can’t prove that bicyclist was trying to get hit.)

    • PhilMcGraw@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 hours ago

      I’m not against the law you mentioned, in my opinion everyone should be driving/riding defensively and crashes are often a failure of both parties to some extent. Even if you’re technically at fault often the other party could have done something to avoid or minimise the accident.

      The insane part was the comparison to scenarios where a party is clearly at fault. How is beating the shit out of a child anywhere near equivalent to hitting a cyclist that has blindly ridden in front of your car with no chance to have predicted it?

        • invalid_name@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 hour ago

          No, sorry, I realized at some point after my first reply here that this is an erotica subreddit. I made the exact same mistake. We were the assholes here, yucking these fine people’s exotic yum. I think I just assumed because it was on Lemmy.world and moy Lemmy.nsfw that it was like the Lemmy version of r/fuck cars. Same for you, right?

          For the record; I absolutely hate cars, but i think sex is the best and most ethical use for them by far. If we must continue to have cars, I support a dick in every seat and a fleshy covering for every stick shift!

          • PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            You’re a bit of a nutter, but that’s okay. I only say that because of the fetish analogy.

            This is an anti-car community, but when blatantly ridiculous posts (like this one) get popular you get an effect similar to the reddit /all effect. Niche communities get swamped with normies and overrun pretty easily.