This is actually pretty dumb - another excess testosterone thrill-seeking fantasy Symbionese Liberation Army style.
Europe has a multi-modal transportation system where people depend on both cars and public transit - and one complement each other. For example, my father uses public transit for everyday commuting (when he was still working) or going around town, but drives to their summer house or to take my mother (who is frail and cannot take a tram or a bus so easily) to her medical appointments.
I was always wondering why do people so many cars in places like Paris or London or Berlin that have excellent public transit (e.g. nothing in the entire English speaking world matches Paris subway, at least when it is not on strike :)) - I think a big part of it status symbol rather than genuine transportation need. This may be suggested by a comparison to places like Amsterdam, whose public transit system is rather modest by European standards due mainly to - Jordan, take note - geography, specifically, big parts of the city being below the seal level so every hole in the ground instantly fills with water. Yet there are few cars in Amsterdam, the preferred mode of transportation is bicycle and tram.
I would agree that the "car culture" i.e. using private autos as status symbols needs to be destroyed, but destroying automobiles is not a good way of doing so. If anything it only creates resentment and determination, and stimulates demand for new automobiles to replace the destroyed ones. A better way is public policy e.g. the so-called planned congestion policy which severely restricts automobile access to urban areas by parking restrictions and tolls. In this country, it would probably spark a revolution, but elsewhere e.g. London, Amsterdam or Prague it works quite effectively.
Wojtek