Also bottlenecks cause more pollution

[deleted]

This. You really want to solve traffic on the BQE? Limit it to freight/business vehicles, taxi/uber, and emergency vehicles during peak hours. 80% of the cars I see entering the BQE at Atlantic during the morning rush are driver-only commuters who would be better served by a mass-trans solution.

Get rid of the smelly horses shitting and pissing all over the place everywhere they go

Why don’t we just make the BQE and Belt one lane? Wouldn’t this create less traffic since induced demand?

felt like they tried to make it a generational thing when it's such a new york thing :-D

Does anyone know of a game development class in NYC?

Ideally it would be introductory or intermediate with the goal of having you build a proof of concept or simple game by the end of the class.

I've tried online tutorials and videos and they just don't get my brain to latch on, I'd love a class with a tangible goal and an instructor.

> resulting in massive traffic backups

Too many cars using the roads at the same time is what causes massive traffic backups. Add 6 new lanes and you'll still have massive traffic backups, as we see in LA. The solution to massive traffic backups is improved alternatives to driving, and more disincentives to driving such as congestion pricing.

Absolutely. SI and NJ are hugely transit underserved, as much as the outer borough loops. And then take in context of the risk of catastrophic structural failure of the current cantilever. The correct answer was "rebuild the entire thing in 2010" but there was one of those decadal "once in a lifetime" global recessions going on. We're long past that date, the current cantilever is somewhere between "likely to collapse" and "imminently collapsing".

They technically closed it, but practically it's still a driving lane to countless cars that use it as a lane still because of 0 enforcement

They’re still annoying as shit.

Also just build the facilities, truck transportation is not the future & not sustainable. All of the problems you just pointed out can easily be solved but that involves change which nobody likes

>you know damn well the risk associated with youth football resulting in traumatic brain injury is, fortunately, statistically zero

Lol what? You can't be serious, can you?

Let me just help you out here -

A CDC study published in Sports Health reports youth tackle football athletes ages 6 to 14 sustained 15 times more head impacts than flag football athletes during a practice or game and sustained 23 times more high-magnitude head impact (hard head impact).

Bay ridge doesn’t have 3rd rail 💀

I said south Brooklyn tf

Sometimes it’s not about getting fed, it’s about watching the other guy get eaten.

Pretty much every time I am on Columbia I see some nut bag driving in the opposite lane of traffic to try and beat the logjam.

That was the intent of closing the 3rd lane. Unfortunately it diverts traffic through the neighborhood and less stress on the bridge.

>But Without the Bounty

To be realistic, even if the city required a payment to file a citizen report, I'm sure a lot of cyclists would happily pay that if that meant the citizen report was actually dealt with.

I'm obviously not proposing that. This is just a commentary about how motivated the cycling community can be.

There's a lot of cardiac arrest in basketball (94% of the youth deaths in basketball are attributed to sudden cardiac death), due to undiagnosed heart conditions. After that there's football with traumatic brain injury, exertional heat stroke, and exertional sickling. These latter 2 being a direct result of overtraining/practicing that isn't seen in other sports. Baseball is due to freak accidents with high speed balls etc.

Will still be effective, not as zealous.

Let's just pretend this isn't a revolutionary change to the nation's leading sport while we also pretend revolutionary changes are typically fully adopted by everyone without question. Your "argument" is willfully ignorant of human behavior in general, you know damn well the risk associated with youth football resulting in traumatic brain injury is, fortunately, statistically zero, but sure, let's all pretend that fact isn't real. You also know your attempt to associate "pro lifers" with parents who might oppose such a rule is a pure red herring, a logical fallacy, and rather juvenile in my opinion. For the record, I support limiting tackle football by age and I'm pro-choice, but that shouldn't matter because arguments made that are ignorant of objective and factual premises don't concern bias, something you appear to have an issue with.

I’m not an expert on this but it’s my understanding that literal deaths in youth football are very rare and are not necessarily higher than in other sports.

I don’t disagree with the overall point though that tackle football at a young age is dangerous and I see merit in this proposed ban

[deleted]

Next they are going to ban my Running Full Speed Headfirst Into A Brickwall youth league :(