“This was not reckless driving. This was murder,” the judge said before she read out Mackenzie Shirilla’s verdict Monday afternoon.

    • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Bcs we lack the infrastructure for them not to require a car & obviously want car companies, roadworks, and petrol industries to continue having huge profits.

    • kozy138@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      57
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Gotta get them teens to work. And no public transit options please, they make my money pile smaller.”

      -CEO’s everywhere

      • thepianistfroggollum@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Right? I honestly can’t wait until self driving cars take up enough of the market share that manual driving cars will be outlawed (or at least getting insurance on them will be astronomically expensive)

          • CoderKat@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            What dumb is that we can improve public transit today. Unlike self driving cars, there is no technological barrier. The only thing stopping us from improving public transit is that fact that humans (especially in North America) are selfish, greedy, easily manipulated, and apathetic.

            Public transit doesn’t improve because not enough people don’t want to use public transit and not enough people want to use public transit because it doesn’t improve.

          • visak@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Not the cars themselves but I think it’ll happen like this: self driving cars will eventually get good enough that they will have a lower accident rate in certain conditions, like highways. Insurance companies will push for self-driving-only lanes on the highway, while not lowering your rates but charging you extra for manual driving. Then it will be segments of highways, then certain surface streets, etc. Eventually you’ll only be driving the “last mile” if it’s a personal car or relying on a service that sends self-driving cars and drops you off on the corner. Manual driving on public streets will mostly disappear.

          • havokdj@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            1 year ago

            Not to mention that self driving cars will be the destruction of the environment.

            If you don’t want to drive, try to use public transportation or possibly human powered vehicles such as bicycles. Cars are bad enough as is. The only reason I even drive is to go to work and the grocery store in my town with basically no public transportation other than taxis.

            • thepianistfroggollum@lemmynsfw.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I have no clue how you came to the conclusion that self driving cars would be more harmful to the environment than human driven ones, but even if the number of cars on the road remained the sane (it would actually drastically decrease), and even if all self driving cars were ICEs, vehicle emissions would still drastically stop.

              If every car was self driving, then every car would know the position of every other car around it and be able to communicate to every other car. Traffic jams would cease to exist, and potentially even stopping at intersections would go away too.

              But, the reality is that once self driving cars reach that critical mass, owning a car won’t be a thing anymore. You’ll pay a service to shuttle you around. Hell, if the service was a public utility then it would be trivial to set up ride sharing for a reduced rate. That would be what drastically decreases the amount of cars on the road.

              • havokdj@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Because self driving cars would allow people who otherwise couldn’t drive for themselves to own yet another car on the road. Teenagers, elderly, people with chronic alcohol addiction, you get the idea.

                I don’t fully buy the “no traffic jams or accidents” thing either. There is definitely the potential for there to be less, but what you are talking about is something that isn’t going to happen for ateast another decade. Surely you remember the Tesla crisis from the last year?

                I can see ride sharing becoming a thing for the people under the poverty line, but realistically speaking, everyone is going to buy a car. There is no incentive for a billions of dollars company to put less cars on the road using ride sharing, some of them already sell you heated seats in the form of a monthly subscription.

                • thepianistfroggollum@lemmynsfw.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  You’re making the mistake of applying the behavior of people today with the behavior of people over a decade from now.

                  Truly autonomous vehicles would fundamentally change the way the world views transportation, it will just take a while to get to that point.

                  By the time we get to a critical mass of self driving cars, it’s very likely that owning cars won’t be a thing outside of the wealthy.

                  The organizations that will be running the transportation services will have a vested interest in keeping as few vehicles in a fleet as possible, thus removing vehicles from the road (if we haven’t reached that point by the time self driving cars are a real thing)

                  Also the idea that the people who couldn’t otherwise own a car would suddenly have $50k+ to go out and buy an autonomous vehicle is silly.

                  • havokdj@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Paying attention to trends is not a mistake, and if anything, consumerism has ramped up much higher over the past few decades, steadily rising even through the great recession.

                    Yes the cost of living has gone up, but there are fallacies in your argument.

                    • If only the wealthy can afford to buy self driving cars, that does not remove regular cars from the road, if anything regular cars would likely wind up becoming cheaper, potentially putting MORE cars on the road.

                    • I agree with the point of organizations, but keep in mind I only agree when it comes to mass public transportation, such as a bus, or a train. The idea of having a car potentially driving a single occupant is incredibly wasteful.

                    • Why are you assuming that the types of people I mentioned cannot afford a $50k vehicle? Those are people who are not inherently broke, they just do not typically have driving privileges. Even then, you are aware that most people do not outright buy a car, correct? Most people finance a vehicle over the course of several years, doing so otherwise is uncommon and dealerships actually hate when you do this because it cuts heavily into their profits because a dealership is essentially a car loanshark supermarket.

    • Mr_Blott
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      Remind the rest of us why anycunt needs a 3 ton personal vehicle again?

      • dragoness@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        At risk of angering the vast majority of the fuck cars community, it’s generally because I live 30 minutes from my job by highway, and can’t afford to live within walking distance. And they won’t let us telework. I really really want to actually live close enough to bike.

      • kandoh@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        So we have a large reoccurring expense that forces us to always have a job and stay productive in a modern society where this really isn’t necessary?

          • kandoh@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            The profit margins of the wealthy are dependent on everyone working 24/7 to sustain. Society can carry on just fine.

        • Mr_Blott
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’ll stick with my 1.2l, 50mpg shitbox thanks

    • krayj@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Because the vast majority of them don’t use the 3ton vehicle to commit murder.

      You do know that adults use vehicles as murder weapons also, yeah?

    • The_Mixer_Dude@lemmus.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      When I think back to how immature and reckless I was as a teenager I can’t believe I was legally allowed to drive and considered a full grown adult at the age of 18.

    • El Barto@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Awesome. Judge all teenagers because of a deranged one.

      What’s your stance on 27 year olds with driver’s licenses?

    • sulfate7016@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      A Camry weighs half of that, and regardless, she could have done this in any vehicle

      • acutfjg@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re not wrong. Being able to drive by 16 so that you can start working is the capitalist way.

    • rab@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Lol which vehicles weigh 3 tons. Aside from EVs. You mean 3 tons as in 6600 lbs right?