Lol, 85 minutes for the next bus is so pitiful.Submitted by MD_till_i_die t3_10hbg6w in baltimore
TerranceBaggz t1_j5c7hja wrote
Reply to comment by Blatmore in Lol, 85 minutes for the next bus is so pitiful. by MD_till_i_die
I mean we do need to do bike lanes. We also need to improve our bus system. More busses with more frequency, signal priority and separated, protected bus lanes. Cars are the problem. Bikes aren’t making busses late, cars and disinvestment are.
Blatmore t1_j5d2cep wrote
Bikes are literally ableist but go off
physicallyatherapist t1_j5dmpq6 wrote
AmputatorBot t1_j5dmqq1 wrote
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of concerns over privacy and the Open Web. Fully cached AMP pages (like the one you shared), are especially problematic.
Maybe check out the canonical page instead: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/9/6/can-a-bike-friendly-city-be-disability-friendly-too
^(I'm a bot | )^(Why & About)^( | )^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)
Blatmore t1_j5eo4xs wrote
It's unreal how problematic you're being. You haven't even begun to imagine the intersectional nature of your offenses. This does real harm to vulnerable folx.
physicallyatherapist t1_j5etjre wrote
Lol
Blatmore t1_j5ffvor wrote
Ok I'm glad we're at a place where we can have fun now. ♥️
TerranceBaggz t1_j5ha1ja wrote
It’s ableist of you to claim disabled people can’t ride bikes. Come up with something that’s not a BS retread as to why you’re carbrained.
Blatmore t1_j5jje1c wrote
This seems very yikes!
TerranceBaggz t1_j5lra8z wrote
Yes you are very yikes. Go troll somewhere else.
Blatmore t1_j5m3u9m wrote
Wow so you're ready to exclude 85% of disabled people?
TerranceBaggz t1_j5pxevz wrote
Wow you’re generalizing all disabled people which is the definition of ableist. While I simply said “it’s ableist of you to claim disabled people can’t ride bikes.” So I cited data that showed you were wrong, you doubled down and proved me correct, then since you knew you did, you goal post moved to yet another incorrect and easily disprovable position. Again, just go away troll.
Blatmore t1_j5qpzdc wrote
You said I was trolling, then you continued to try to argue. So I tried to be even more absurd.
I still say bike lanes are ableist. Particularly when 85% of disabled people can't use them.
TerranceBaggz t1_j5r0x78 wrote
Just because “only” 15% of disabled people cycle (actually surprisingly high IMO) doesn’t mean 85% of disabled can’t use bike lanes. That’s a logical fallacy and is easily proven wrong. People in wheelchairs and mobility scooters etc use them all the time to get around. In fact that was a primary motivator for the Big Jump on Druid Hill Lake Dr. I’ve seen plenty of disabled people using Maryland Avenue also. But if you never bike, and only ever drive around sheltered in a car, you don’t notice these things. Also, you are trolling. It doesn’t mean your stupid arguments aren’t worth swatting aside and disproving so that others can learn from your stupidity.
Blatmore t1_j5r3dxn wrote
You know, I never actually opposed bike lanes before, but you're so insufferably sanctimonious and condescending that I will now be a single issue voter: no bike lanes. In fact, I will now call them bike "lames" because of how lame they are.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments