|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#121
|
|||
|
|||
only buses protect me from SUVs
On May 23, 11:28 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
In article , Nobody writes: A pleasant urban environment that doesn't get its citizens anxiously grinding their teeth in their sleep or coming down with athsma is also good. Your personal intentions and aspirations are admirable.. but to expect two million plus other citizens in Greater Vancouver to follow those weather-related flagellations is, well, quirky at best. I don't expect them all to follow those "weather-related flagellations." I'm just saying: those who wanna ... can. And it's not that bad. It could be better. It can be /made/ better. But practical bicycle transportation is quite do-able right now. Let's all abandon Mister Ford's automobile, and ride the current street car ("SkyTrain") and autobus! Hurrah! Alternative transportation is not regressive. Fine, but don't expect the Great Majority to hitch their pinnies and hoops, and clasp a hand on baseball cap while peddling a two-wheeler across 25km of up hill and down dale in rain and shine amd sleet and snow and wind and gust.. well, you get the message. What about the folks who only need to go 10 km or 5 km? It simply is not practicable (note the use of adjective), either by wish or function. It is for me, and for many others. And for many more who are hold back by the unnecessary danger present on our roads... Are SUV drivers more reckless? This is subjective, in other words what I see around with my own eyes, but it seems that size and recklessness go hand in hand, all the way up to the Supersized Unnecessary Vehicles... So are they the new terrorists of the road, or just innocent suckers who fell for advertising? Just wondering... --Whatever keeps you from driving an older econo car or a newer microcar like a honda fit?-- I rather keep fit in my SUB (smart utility bike). Well, rethinking my strategy in light of the Darwinian roads where I'm forced to drive. Even smaller cars put me at the wrong end of the food chain. I guess only buses protect me from the big predators out there. |
Ads |
#122
|
|||
|
|||
only buses protect me from SUVs
On May 24, 1:53 pm, donquijote1954
wrote: On May 23, 11:28 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote: In article , Nobody writes: A pleasant urban environment that doesn't get its citizens anxiously grinding their teeth in their sleep or coming down with athsma is also good. Your personal intentions and aspirations are admirable.. but to expect two million plus other citizens in Greater Vancouver to follow those weather-related flagellations is, well, quirky at best. I don't expect them all to follow those "weather-related flagellations." I'm just saying: those who wanna ... can. And it's not that bad. It could be better. It can be /made/ better. But practical bicycle transportation is quite do-able right now. Let's all abandon Mister Ford's automobile, and ride the current street car ("SkyTrain") and autobus! Hurrah! Alternative transportation is not regressive. Fine, but don't expect the Great Majority to hitch their pinnies and hoops, and clasp a hand on baseball cap while peddling a two-wheeler across 25km of up hill and down dale in rain and shine amd sleet and snow and wind and gust.. well, you get the message. What about the folks who only need to go 10 km or 5 km? It simply is not practicable (note the use of adjective), either by wish or function. It is for me, and for many others. And for many more who are hold back by the unnecessary danger present on our roads... Are SUV drivers more reckless? This is subjective, in other words what I see around with my own eyes, but it seems that size and recklessness go hand in hand, all the way up to the Supersized Unnecessary Vehicles... So are they the new terrorists of the road, or just innocent suckers who fell for advertising? Just wondering... --Whatever keeps you from driving an older econo car or a newer microcar like a honda fit?-- I rather keep fit in my SUB (smart utility bike). Well, rethinking my strategy in light of the Darwinian roads where I'm forced to drive. Even smaller cars put me at the wrong end of the food chain. I guess only buses protect me from the big predators out there. I am in a small town in the middle of nowhere. In the last two weeks, we have had two bus incidents. One was a lacrosse bus (that my son was on) that his a mogal in the road so hard that it ripped the kid- gate off the front of the bus. A couple of kids hit the ceiling. Then last week, a bus (with the lights flashing) was slowing down to drop off kids and it was rear-ended by a tractor trailer. 3 kids and the driver hurt. Nothing too serious. 4 kids okay. Busses are safe, but maybe not as safe as I had thought. |
#123
|
|||
|
|||
only buses protect me from SUVs
On May 24, 1:53 pm, donquijote1954
wrote: On May 23, 11:28 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote: In article , Nobody writes: A pleasant urban environment that doesn't get its citizens anxiously grinding their teeth in their sleep or coming down with athsma is also good. Your personal intentions and aspirations are admirable.. but to expect two million plus other citizens in Greater Vancouver to follow those weather-related flagellations is, well, quirky at best. I don't expect them all to follow those "weather-related flagellations." I'm just saying: those who wanna ... can. And it's not that bad. It could be better. It can be /made/ better. But practical bicycle transportation is quite do-able right now. Let's all abandon Mister Ford's automobile, and ride the current street car ("SkyTrain") and autobus! Hurrah! Alternative transportation is not regressive. Fine, but don't expect the Great Majority to hitch their pinnies and hoops, and clasp a hand on baseball cap while peddling a two-wheeler across 25km of up hill and down dale in rain and shine amd sleet and snow and wind and gust.. well, you get the message. What about the folks who only need to go 10 km or 5 km? It simply is not practicable (note the use of adjective), either by wish or function. It is for me, and for many others. And for many more who are hold back by the unnecessary danger present on our roads... Are SUV drivers more reckless? This is subjective, in other words what I see around with my own eyes, but it seems that size and recklessness go hand in hand, all the way up to the Supersized Unnecessary Vehicles... So are they the new terrorists of the road, or just innocent suckers who fell for advertising? Just wondering... --Whatever keeps you from driving an older econo car or a newer microcar like a honda fit?-- I rather keep fit in my SUB (smart utility bike). Well, rethinking my strategy in light of the Darwinian roads where I'm forced to drive. Even smaller cars put me at the wrong end of the food chain. I guess only buses protect me from the big predators out there.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Under that logic, you should start by banning 53-foot trailers and tandems. |
#124
|
|||
|
|||
only buses protect me from SUVs
wrote in message
oups.com... On May 24, 1:53 pm, donquijote1954 wrote: I rather keep fit in my SUB (smart utility bike). Well, rethinking my strategy in light of the Darwinian roads where I'm forced to drive. Even smaller cars put me at the wrong end of the food chain. I guess only buses protect me from the big predators out there.- Hide quoted text - Under that logic, you should start by banning 53-foot trailers and tandems. Many/most drivers of _any_ type of vehicle would be happy to see that, but the teamsters will make sure it never happens. Instead, we're going the other way, allowing doubles and now even triples. Bicyclists would be better served by bike trails that kept them off the streets for the majority of their trip anyways. More linear parks would be a nice side benefit that any resident would support, and it's easy to include bike trains in them at nearly no cost. Even sidewalk maintenance (where they exist) is widely supported by local voters. The key for "quality of life" stuff like this is getting local politicians to change spending priorities and zoning rules, rather than trying to influence corrupt state or national politicians who care only about getting campaign contributions from unions and other lobbies. S -- Stephen Sprunk "Those people who think they know everything CCIE #3723 are a great annoyance to those of us who do." K5SSS --Isaac Asimov -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
#125
|
|||
|
|||
only buses protect me from SUVs
On May 24, 4:24 pm, "Stephen Sprunk" wrote:
wrote in message oups.com... On May 24, 1:53 pm, donquijote1954 wrote: I rather keep fit in my SUB (smart utility bike). Well, rethinking my strategy in light of the Darwinian roads where I'm forced to drive. Even smaller cars put me at the wrong end of the food chain. I guess only buses protect me from the big predators out there.- Hide quoted text - Under that logic, you should start by banning 53-foot trailers and tandems. Many/most drivers of _any_ type of vehicle would be happy to see that, but the teamsters will make sure it never happens. Instead, we're going the other way, allowing doubles and now even triples. Bicyclists would be better served by bike trails that kept them off the streets for the majority of their trip anyways. More linear parks would be a nice side benefit that any resident would support, and it's easy to include bike trains in them at nearly no cost. Great idea. Once Broadway, Woodward, Yonge, The Strand and the Champs d'Elyssée are turned into linear parks we should be a lot better off. Even sidewalk maintenance (where they exist) is widely supported by local voters. The key for "quality of life" stuff like this is getting local politicians to change spending priorities and zoning rules, rather than trying to influence corrupt state or national politicians who care only about getting campaign contributions from unions and other lobbies. S -- Stephen Sprunk "Those people who think they know everything CCIE #3723 are a great annoyance to those of us who do." K5SSS --Isaac Asimov -- Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com |
#126
|
|||
|
|||
only buses protect me from SUVs
Stephen Sprunk wrote:
Bicyclists would be better served by bike trails that kept them off the streets for the majority of their trip anyways. Oh sure. You mean, "Motorists would be better served by bike trails that kept bicyclists off the streets..." Wayne |
#127
|
|||
|
|||
only buses protect me from SUVs
In article ,
"Stephen Sprunk" writes in part: Bicyclists would be better served by bike trails that kept them off the streets for the majority of their trip anyways. Not necessarily. Transportational cyclists need access to the same destinations as do car drivers. We have actual places to go, and actual reasons to go there, same as anyone else. We'd be better served by more people understanding that, and not impeding us. -- Nothing is safe from me. Above address is just a spam midden. I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca |
#128
|
|||
|
|||
What American Cities are Missing: Bikes by the Thousands
|
#129
|
|||
|
|||
What American Cities are Missing: Bikes by the Thousands
|
#130
|
|||
|
|||
only buses protect me from SUVs
On May 24, 3:17 pm, "
wrote: On May 24, 1:53 pm, donquijote1954 wrote: On May 23, 11:28 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote: In article , Nobody writes: A pleasant urban environment that doesn't get its citizens anxiously grinding their teeth in their sleep or coming down with athsma is also good. Your personal intentions and aspirations are admirable.. but to expect two million plus other citizens in Greater Vancouver to follow those weather-related flagellations is, well, quirky at best. I don't expect them all to follow those "weather-related flagellations." I'm just saying: those who wanna ... can. And it's not that bad. It could be better. It can be /made/ better. But practical bicycle transportation is quite do-able right now. Let's all abandon Mister Ford's automobile, and ride the current street car ("SkyTrain") and autobus! Hurrah! Alternative transportation is not regressive. Fine, but don't expect the Great Majority to hitch their pinnies and hoops, and clasp a hand on baseball cap while peddling a two-wheeler across 25km of up hill and down dale in rain and shine amd sleet and snow and wind and gust.. well, you get the message. What about the folks who only need to go 10 km or 5 km? It simply is not practicable (note the use of adjective), either by wish or function. It is for me, and for many others. And for many more who are hold back by the unnecessary danger present on our roads... Are SUV drivers more reckless? This is subjective, in other words what I see around with my own eyes, but it seems that size and recklessness go hand in hand, all the way up to the Supersized Unnecessary Vehicles... So are they the new terrorists of the road, or just innocent suckers who fell for advertising? Just wondering... --Whatever keeps you from driving an older econo car or a newer microcar like a honda fit?-- I rather keep fit in my SUB (smart utility bike). Well, rethinking my strategy in light of the Darwinian roads where I'm forced to drive. Even smaller cars put me at the wrong end of the food chain. I guess only buses protect me from the big predators out there.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Under that logic, you should start by banning 53-foot trailers and tandems.- They know how to drive. The avarage semi driver is well above the average Joe SUV. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What American Cities are Missing: Bikes by the Thousands | donquijote1954 | General | 360 | June 12th 07 05:16 PM |
American bikes best! | yourbuddy | General | 2 | December 21st 05 02:47 AM |
NYC Power Proclamation Sets Lead for American Cities | Cycle America | General | 0 | April 28th 05 10:48 PM |
NYC Power Proclamation Sets Lead for American Cities | Cycle America | Rides | 0 | April 28th 05 10:48 PM |
Do good value for performance bikes have to be American? | Jo Stoller | UK | 23 | June 15th 04 08:31 PM |