Fatalities In The War On Cars Are Never In Cars

by Dan Savage, The Portland Mercury

If a pedestrian jumped off a sidewalk, ran into the street, pulled a driver out of her car, and inflicted injuries so severe that the driver died moments later in the arms of a passing stranger.... that pedestrian would probably face more severe consequences than the driver who killed Erica Stark:
...

[B' Spokes: A better analogy would be if pedestrians were juggling chainsaws and the whoops I just killed someone (http://dearestdistrict5.blogspot.com/2016/04/everyone-plays-part-in-chainsaw-safety.html ). But I do think the author makes a good point, the so called war on cars does not result in cars death, only an inconvenience in parking and perhaps in travel time. On no! People spent a lot of money on a luxury item that is not living up to it's potential like a bunch of spoiled brats. Totally ignoring the real reasons, cars were great when few had them and few drove but to design a city where everyone drives on infrastructure designed and funded by 1950 standard of one car per family. Now driving is a miserable experience, too many cars on the road, so the solution is more cars! Alright it's more no or little accommodations for non driving so people are encouraged by threat of death to drive. And in the end, cars loose unless there is a war on cars and their over use. If cars are indeed are the luxury item people want, then they should welcome paying extra in taxes for first class accommodations while the rest of use make due with what's not set aside for cars. What's that, cars already too expensive so you want other people to help pay for your luxury? Hmm.]

http://www.portlandmercury.com/blogtown/2016/12/06/18730471/fatalities-in-the-war-on-cars-are-never-in-cars