It sounds like you failed to consider what “practically” means. It’s all about bringing the use of cars to nearly zero, with the understanding that for the few people who truly need a car all the time, or the many people who need a car a few times, the options still mean that the cars being used go down. For what it’s worth, people who need to carry stuff generally have all sorts of choices between bags and carts, and people who can’t walk well are usually served decently well by accessible stations and trains. Safety is of course a personal preference but solving it by sitting in a two ton bubble is kind of the wrong way to go about it, no?
People who have problems to walk tend to avoid taking public transports that long walkways, long connections, stairs (and elevators or escalators not working, which is a frequent problem in Paris), lots of people who are in a hurry to get somewhere else. It makes for a stressful and pitiful experience. They are much better served by having their own car to remove all the pain.
Sure, public transport is all fine when you are a teenager or a young adult, but thinking it's a good solution for people of all ages and medical conditions is just believing in a lie.
> but solving it by sitting in a two ton bubble is kind of the wrong way to go about it, no?
There is safety with known risks, which is taking a car and driving somewhere, and then completely unknown and random risks when taking public transports in Paris. I prefer known risks any day.
This is definitely not universally true. As long as the transit doesn’t suck (like, miles of walks, long delays) it is commonly used by people of all walks of life. For people with certain disabilities (e.g. vision problems) driving may be completely out of the question and having public transportation can be liberating. Now, I can understand there being issues with things being broken or not wanted to be buffeted around during rush hour, but those aren’t fundamental problems with it. You can definitely improve these by, for example, providing multiple elevators, or at-grade stations. Calling an Uber or taxi once in a while in the absolute worst case is still a massive win for everyone.
And, for what it’s worth, the risks are only unknown if you don’t take public transit. People who are frequent riders know all the good and bad lines and what times to take them just like you probably know which parts of the city you don’t want to drive through at night. Not to mention that a clean, safe, well-trafficked subway can often directly skip you through parts of the city you don’t want to go through.
> Safety is of course a personal preference but solving it by sitting in a two ton bubble is kind of the wrong way to go about it, no?
Safety is also largely a psychological issue. People don’t want to be safe (most of the time they have no clue), they want to feel safe (which depends on personal experience and prejudice). Even a quick and dirty analysis of accidents statistics shows that driving is much less safe than public transport.
