If we were to ban cars, what would happen to emergency services?
If we were to ban cars, what would happen to emergency services?
Firstly, I'm aware that my question gives the impression that I hold anti-urbaninst views but that's not the case. If such a measure were to be implemented I would fully support it. I'm merely curious as to what would happen to emergency services if a total ban on personal, motorized vehicles was enacted. I'm especially curious to how cities or even countries with low car dependency handle EMS.
Emergency vehicles are not personal vehicles.
We want to ban cars, not:
-
tradespersons' work trucks and vans
-
public transit, including taxis and paratransit vans
-
emergency vehicles
-
shipping trucks
-
vintage cars-as-art-objects (though we would ban driving them)
This is what much of nyc traffic has become, esp in Manhattan.
My guess would be that taxis are a large fraction of that traffic, and that would be the first variable to turn down once those categories congest the system by themselves.
-
Pedestrianised areas are still accessible by emergency services.
By banning cars: public transport would still be required, deliveries would still need to be made, and i imagine there would be allowances for accessibility requirements.
Its not like cities would place down concrete blocks to entirely cut off access for all vehiclesJFC no one is suggesting banning emergency vehicles.
Emergency services vehicles' journeys are faster and easier if the roads aren't cluttered with private vehicles.
They can get closer to the scene if they aren't having to negotiate on-street parking full of cars.
They will be called to fewer severe road traffic accidents.
A total ban on personalized vehicles is not something most urbanists want. We want traffic calmed streets and viable alternatives ie bike lanes and good public transit. We want taking transit around our cities to be as fast or faster than driving. While many of these goals require changes like less/smaller lanes, congestion fees, and reduced street parking, roads will still exist to be used by private vehicles, emergency vehicles and delivery vehicles.
I think the operative word there is “personal “
Restaurants would need food and supplies delivered… so suppliers would need trucks. See also ups FedEx and Amazon (GDISM)
EMS , fire, and police would still have vehicles…
Most commercial vehicles would still need to operate; unless there were a way to ship intra-city supply via taxi or bus or subway… so — trucks would be around for a while
Restaurants would need food and supplies delivered… so suppliers would need trucks. See also ups FedEx and Amazon (GDISM)
True, although deliveries to homes themselves could (and are) be done by cycling and other micromobility options, especially for smaller items.
The idea isn't to get rid of cars, but get rid of the need for cars.
When I lived in Montréal, I took my car maybe every 2-3 months usually driving a couple hours out of the city for family, or big purchases.
I was actively avoiding taking the car because it was genuinely a worse experience. Not because the city makes it a pain, but by the time I'd have woken up my car from deep sleep and navigated out of the parking, I literally could have been at my destination already if I had just walked. Even taking a metro and a bus to get to work is faster than many american's daily commutes, and I get to play games or read a boot or whatever on the way, munch on some food. Get a couple drinks on the way home without having to worry about being sober enough to drive.
Taking a car to go 500ft away is just dumb.
Thank you, everyone! Before I go any further, let me address the obvious: the dislikes. This question was received negatively and, to be honest, it was well deserved. Reading my post once again, it was poorly worded and gives the impression of naivety. Nonetheless, I loved the answers that I received. Really great points; some of which I hadn't considered before. Once again, I want to thank all of you for your feedback.
Ban cars to me is shorthand for ban private cars, has nothing to do with EMS, or even public owned shared cars for that occasional time a car might necessary.
An 80% reduction in cars should be easy. 90% reduction with a few tweeks i'd think.
Helicopters, house on fire no worries an airplane loaded with water will douse it and maybe the whole block.
If there were much less cars in the world (mostly cities), with an abundance of properly working motorized public services (ambulances, buses, coaches etc....), world would be less polluted for sure.
The real polluters are freights, huge vessels and airplanes (private ones especially)