War on cars?

[CarDriver]

Whenever the blog has an article about road changes that will impact car drivers always the same commenters applauding the restrictions. What I find most interesting is that those same, if you’ve paid attention to blog posts have talked about their cars. Evidently their hope is that restrictions will only impact “those other” drivers and will leave more room for them.

Share This

[anonyme]

I’m probably one of those commenters and I’ve never owned a car. However, isn’t it possible to be a car owner who also believes in sensible driving restrictions?

Share This

[CarDriver]

Anonyme. Absolutely agree that existing laws should be enforced. No argument from me on that. Also believe that “road diets and building with no parking” has not and will not entice people to sell their cars. My point is that everyone utilizes cars. You may not own one and I get that it’s expensive to own and operate a car. However, guessing those that don’t own probably utilize rideshares or taxi’s or rent or ride with family or friends in their cars. And, if you order anything online, you’re requiring someone else to drive their car to deliver.

Share This

[CarDriver]

Will add here. You’ve probably read about all the accidents by the “dancing people”. That curve was PARTIALLY repaved during the closure. The other half of the curve is the original warn smooth pavement. Don’t need a degree in rocket science to figure out why there are accidents there. But if you read the blog comments NOBODY wants to acknowledge that truth. Why is that? If people truly want safe roads for ALL users, then the truth must come out. If its poor road conditions blame that-nothing else. If it’s a pedestrian or bike rider that don’t follow the laws that are on the books hold them accountable. If it’s a driver breaking a traffic law that causes an accident/injury hold them accountable.

Share This

[anonyme]

There are a broad range of possibilities between never engaging in a single act that involves transportation at any point, and the frivolous use of single-occupant, gas-powered vehicles. No one is going to disagree that we all need transportation at some level, directly or indirectly. How, when, why, and for how much is the issue. Those on the other end of the spectrum who believe that it is their right to drive everywhere, any time, for any reason are on the losing end of history. It’s not 1950 any more, nor is it a “war”. It is much needed change, for some pretty obvious reasons that don’t involve covering more of the planet in concrete.

Share This

[CarDriver]

Question is then: Who decides what “frivolous use” is? Is it the commenters on the blog who call out car use but have slipped up and told the truth that they have cars? Is it the city who lets developers build with no off-street parking because they’re just sure the people moving in won’t have or will sell their car? I’ve seen what happens: side street suddenly fill up with cars. Is it the city who closes off streets, narrows lanes etc.in the hope that making driving more difficult people will sell their cars? Hasn’t worked. While you’re right it’s not 1950 anymore and alternate transportation methods should be enhanced and promoted the recognition needs to be made that what’s been done to get people to not drive has not worked.

Share This

[skeeter]

Hey CarDriver – have you read the book “Carmageddon” by Daniel Knowles? I think you’d really enjoy it. Cars are wonderful tools, but they have shockingly high social, environmental, and economic costs. LMK if you’d like to meet up to discuss after you read it. https://www.amazon.com/Carmageddon-Cars-Make-Worse-About/dp/1419758802

Share This

[CarDriver]

Looks like an interesting point of view that nobody cares about. Economics: Amazon wouldn’t exist if employees couldn’t drive to the warehouses to fill the orders. Nothing would get delivered without vehicles. Grocery and retail stores and restaurants don’t get their supplies (or employees) by magic levitation. Someone has to get to the warehouses and fill the orders and drive the goods to them. Brother-in-law retired as a bus driver for Metro. He and 99.99% of the drivers and mechanics needed to, and did drive (by themselves) to the Metro bases. Oh, busses pollute also. Betting most if not all ST drivers and mechanics drive to work I, and nobody else can, or will deny the environmental and economic impact of internal combustion conveyances but I’m like everyone else who isn’t giving it up. At least I’m honest about it. But I sure get a laugh at the anti-car comments from people who use or benefit from them daily but pretend they don’t.

• This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by WSB.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by CarDriver.

Share This

[skeeter]

CarDriver – first of all, thanks for your honesty. I also try to be honest about my choices and recognize that my choices are part of the problem — every time I drive in a car or bus I am contributing to climate change. Every time I drive in a car I create road congestion that slows other people down and wastes their time. But that doesn’t mean I can’t applaud and encourage initiatives that give more people an ability to make sustainable transportation choices. That doesn’t mean I’m anti-car. Cars are useful tools and will remain part of our transportation system for decades. But we need a better solution than what we’ve got now. We need to prioritize sustainable transportation like transit, bicycling, and walking so that people have more tools to get around without a car.

Share This

[Author]

Posts