in a city that doesn't produce even 1/25 of microplastic thousand kilos vehicles produce? because that also has an impact on marine ecosystems, by the way, cars are linked as one of the highest if not the, pollutants of microplastic. in a city that doesn't have air pollution linked towards a bunch of disease? in a city that doesn't have noise pollution that also has a bazinga of negative impact?

are you really naive to believe cyclists wouldn't respect traffic lights on a city designed after walk and public transportation? or are you thinking on the minimal cyclists that get killed by tresspasing this rule by vehicles that get a mild scratch? or the light or mild injuries bicycles at 15-25 km/h are gonna cause between each other?

edit: i would even go further and hope personal vehicles production is ceased and their circulation becomes a crime for citizens on non-legal or non essential services duties. i would live perfectly fine in a city without those but who controls the speed of my bicycle on cycle paths or that lock my brakes if i try to cycle high

You didn't answer his question: Would you be willing to have your bicycle brakes linked up with GPS and red light signals? Or loaded down with sensors monitoring and correcting your bicycling activity for your own safety?

> are you really naive to believe cyclists wouldn't respect traffic lights on a city designed after walk and public transportation? or are you thinking on the minimal cyclists that get killed by tresspasing this rule by vehicles that get a mild scratch? or the light or mild injuries bicycles at 15-25 km/h are gonna cause between each other?

An excellent demonstration of "cyclebrain syndrome", the urban twin to suburbia's "carbrain syndrome".

> are you really naive to believe cyclists wouldn't respect traffic lights on a city designed after walk and public transportation?

Translation: I am aware of cyclists' ubiquitous poor behavior on the roads but will reach for any justification to shift responsibility to someone else. "Drivers wouldn't be running red lights if you just added a couple more lanes, bro."

> or are you thinking on the minimal cyclists that get killed by tresspasing this rule by vehicles that get a mild scratch?

Translation: And when cyclists' poor behavior causes a fatal collision with a car, nobody cares about the damaged property. Or the mental anguish, or the collisions caused by narrowly avoiding killing an errant cyclist (who survives, oblivious, thanks to the driver's quick action choosing a more costly crash over a "mild scratch" that kills the cyclist).

> or the light or mild injuries bicycles at 15-25 km/h are gonna cause between each other?

Translation: I don't give a shit about killing/injuring pedestrians any more than car drivers do. I only care about collisions with things that are about the size of my vehicle or bigger. And if those other things are bigger than my vehicle--I want them banned! That way I reduce the risk to me, which is what I really care about, and who cares what happens to anything smaller than me?

I don't totally disagree.

The USA was designed by Ford motor company, for cars, by cars. That was a mistake.