This all reads like entitled driver behavior to me. Or dumb college antics that are best left behind.
-former car owner
You sure? GP:
>Before the police showed up, an SUV showed up with some tow truck heavies with, no doubt, plenty of illegal weapons on them, just to spectate and make sure things went the way they wanted.
Sounds more like thugs engaging in predatory behavior to me.
Isn't the whole point of a cul de sac that there isn't much traffic through it? Doesn't the cul de sac itself block traffic?
Because nobody strongly abuses this, it generally works fine and people go on with their lives around them. Even with the small neighborhood streets around Tokyo, you rarely see it being treated as an issue. At worst, if a truck is trying to pass, a quick honk will cause whoever is driving to rush out and move the car.
I do get disillusioned sometimes though, living in a society where people have a general level of respect for each other.
There’s your likely reason for why the rule is strictly enforced in the US.
Really, it makes no sense to me that people demand and expect law enforcement to work equally for everyone while also wanting to make an exception of themselves.
This might have something to do with it.
I first saw this behavior when I went to school in Rochester, NY and wondered what the hell everybody was doing. Never encountered it growing up outside of Boston.
I also agree on the baseline level of respect and order, going back to Sydney is sometimes jarring where some things don’t ‘just work’ as they do here.
But I'm not talking about blocking the road entirely, of course that's not the case, just parking in places that is not allowed to park statically.
Couldn't help but get that in there could you.
A person can be both right and sanctimonious
I cannot say about this particular case.
1. I like the outdoors and they don't put bus lines 200 miles from the nearest gas station.
2. Work is often further than walking or biking distance.
3. I need to haul more than a few days worth of groceries. Or a larger item.
I think what people are getting upset at is you are conflating not driving with some higher form of intellect when in reality it's a privilege really only afforded to people who live in often high cost of living areas. This implies a socioeconomic status to yourself whether you like it or not and so people feel you are talking down to them. I interpreted it as you were talking down to me too. It's not about me being "done" with road rage, or whatever, it's about the fact that my town, my life, and the country in general won't let me be "done" with it. Nor will my hobbies. For many of us a car is not a privilege it's an absolutely basal level necessity. No amount of cheerleading for the anti-car crowd will change that. I suspect it won't change in my lifetime either.
But that’s them presuming, I neither meant nor actually said that and I explained my intent above. It’s a mistake on their part. That fine, that’s life, but says more about them than me.
>when in reality it's a privilege really only afforded to people who live in often high cost of living areas.
Totally, that’s why I called it a privilege myself in the comment you’re replying to. People seem to have layered a stereotype onto me because I said I was a former car owner. It’s like saying you don’t own a television-maybe it’s often said in arrogance but sometimes you actually have a good reason to mention it.