Not the first time this has happened either, here’s another similar case in Atlanta: https://abcnews.go.com/US/mother-boy-killed-hit-run-driver-probation-community/story?id=14158040
Not the first time this has happened either, here’s another similar case in Atlanta: https://abcnews.go.com/US/mother-boy-killed-hit-run-driver-probation-community/story?id=14158040
@aeischeid For anyone capable of basic logic it would have been. Obviously having services readily available is not tyrannical, being unable to travel is, what other significant aspects of 15 minute cities are there? Do you really want your life controlled to this degree?
@nanook @aeischeid No one capable of basic logic thinks 15 minute cities have anything to do with restricting travel. Either you’re being disingenuous, or you’re sorely lacking in the logic you think you possess.
Has anyone ever actually said, “I think we should have all services within a zone of 15-minute travel, and we should restrict people from leaving their zone, and this is called 15 Minute Cities and I support that idea”?
“Having services readily available” is the entire idea. “You’re not allowed to go to another area” is nonsense that someone else tacked on to the concept to make people hate it.
@sthetic But that’s not what they are doing. In Oxford, they blocked off most of the streets between the cities sections with planters forcing you to go to an outer ring, after people threatened to hang the city council they reneg’d but if you aren’t vigilant this is what they do.
I looked this up and found this information about it:
First, the article says it was separate. Nobody said, “We are blocking everybody’s access to this road because the goal of 15-Minute City is to restrict people and forbid them from leaving their zone.”
Second, it was just traffic-calming. They put up some planters blocking roads to vehicles to encourage access by bike, pedestrians, etc. That’s not restricting access, that is INCREASING access. By bikes.
They decided that a different, busier road was more appropriate for cars. How on earth does that equate to restricting access? So your car had to drive further, using a big busy road instead of a local quiet street - boo-hoo! This, to you, was a sign that the government wants to confine you to a 15 minute area and never let you leave?
Are the following measures, to you, a sign of nefarious “restricting access”?
All of those technically “restrict access” by your seeming definition. Well, at least by vehicle. Is it your assertion that private vehicles reign supreme, and if the government does anything to slow down, discourage, or increase the cost of vehicle travel, it means their future goal is to create walled mini-cities that folks can’t leave?
Edit: also, you say that people threatened to hang the city council to get them to renege - are you proud of this? Your “side” is threatening to murder people if they don’t govern the way they want, and that’s just “being vigilant”? To prevent planters from being placed on a street? What the hell?
@sthetic I don’t live there but relayed info from someone who does. You can sit quietly while they build a cage around you, that is not what I choose to do.
I have literally never seen the idea of a 15 minute city being restrictive anywhere other than the ravings of Alex Jones tier wingnuts. Everybody who actually pushes the concept just thinks you should have a grocery store, a doctor’s office, a library etc. near your house.
Edit: and don’t get it twisted, nobody is saying you should be forced to relocate either, it’s a guideline for urban planning.