• warbond@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Mentally ill person with a gun kills their daughter and these mfers are like “hmm, what can taco bell do about this?”

  • i_stole_ur_taco@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Yeah, great, it’s the “one more lane” mentality only now it’s being applied to fucking drive thrus!

  • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Americans gonna remodel their sacred drive-throughs by law mandates in order to … (project a facade of trying to) lower gun violence (??) rather than tackle gun violence?

    Have I understood that correctly?

  • grue@lemmy.worldOPM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Seems to me that changing the zoning code to disallow drive-thrus entirely would be an even better idea.

    • Drusas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Accidental ableism detected. I fucking love being able to get food without getting out of my car. I wish I could get something other than fast food this way, maybe a nice salad or sandwich.

      • pc486@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Requiring a car to eat is ableist. Wheelchair user? Not allowed in the drive though for liability reasons. Blind? Epileptic? Not allowed to drive at all, thus not allowed to buy food because the dining room is closed in the late hours.

      • grue@lemmy.worldOPM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        There may be folks with some types of disabilities who benefit from using a drive thru, but there are also folks with other types of disabilities who can’t use a drive thru because they can’t drive and who are materially harmed by the lack of walkability drive-thrus cause.

        In fact, considering that there’s nothing in the Americans with Disabilities Act that requires restaurants to have drive-thrus, and moreover that lawsuits regarding drive-thrus and people with disabilities tend to be almost universally about people who can’t use the drive-thru being forced to use it rather than the other way around, I’m very confident that my position isn’t ableist.

        (And that’s considering your argument at face value, which is pretty charitable considering how often it’s made in bad faith.)