sharx35 wrote:
> "Bolwerk" wrote in message
> news:7mnzh.8$e26.0@newsfe10.lga...
>> sharx35 wrote:
>>> "Bolwerk" wrote in message
>>> news:5kezh.77$me6.40@newsfe11.lga...
>>>> sharx35 wrote:
>>>>> "Peter Schleifer" wrote in message
>>>>> news:93vns219rjtlupkoicigq14tmbmdpua8v0@4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 11:14:28 -0600, Doug McDonald
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The best path to safety is to design roads that
>>>>>>> are straight, have high speed limits, few stop signs
>>>>>>> or stop lights, and excellent visibility.
>>>>>> Where I live there is no possibility of building new roads, every
>>>>>> intersection has a light or stop sign and the biggest impairment to
>>>>>> visibility is from parked cars.
>>>>> I've always believed that streets should be for the MOVING of traffic,
>>>>> NOT the storage of vehicles. ALL parking should be off street. If you
>>>>> can afford multiple vehicles you should damn well provide OFF street
>>>>> parking for ALL your vehicles plus those of your guests.
>>>> In more urban areas, streets are also for pedestrians. Unless you're
>>>> following the Robert Moses adage, "cities are for traffic," streets
>>>> simply can't function perfectly that way.
>>> SIDEWALKS and trails are for pedestrians. STREETS are for vehicles. What
>>> part of that is so difficult for you luddites to understand?
>> That's simply not the case. Again, vehicles are guests in an urban
>> residential neighborhood, especially ones where streets predated
>> automobiles by centuries. Driving can be permissible, but neighborhood
>> life becomes dangerous when the needs of cars are met at the expense of
>> everyone else.
>
> The streets were paid for out of general taxation to which ALL taxpayers
> contributed. WHY should I be prohibited from driving on ANY street? YOUR
> streets are NOT private since YOU didn't personally pay for the whole
> cost--along with your neighbours. When the day comes that a community pays
> for ALL of its own infrastructure, then, and only then, can THAT community
> dictate who uses its streets.
I don't see why anybody should be restricted from using public streets,
but the use has to be defined.
Why should you be prohibited from driving on a public street? Maybe
because drivers aren't permitted on the particular public street.
*How* a street is used is a different story than who can use it - it's
perfectly conceivable for a street to have no vehicles on it, restricted
vehicle use (commercial only, for deliveries perhaps, or perhaps
emergency services only), etc. |