Here is how I have been framing the issue recently in my discourse with elected officials etc:
"Since when is it OK for the swift, the mighty, and the heavily-armored to so dominate public thoroughfares that most people would not DREAM of walking or bicycling along them?" I think this message is getting thru a bit. We will never build enough "separate but equal" infrastructure to keep all or even most bicyclists and pedestrians separated from motor vehicle traffic. If we are ever going to achieve significantly higher rates of walking and biking, motorists will have to be taught to defer to them. Perhaps this is politically impossible right now. But if/when we are forced to cope with fuel rationing, this would change in a heartbeat. Meanwhile, I say let's put elected officials on the spot: "We want a commitment from you to walk and/or bike on a REGULAR BASIS - once a week, say - to one or more of your destinations!" The only way to get this stuff is to get it viscerally, and visceral understanding cannot be acquired from behind a windshield or by sitting on a chair in an office. Another part of the problem is how we speak. We say, "That road isn't safe" rather than "The behaviors of some/many/most motorists on that road is unsafe". We are a culture that is lethally addicted to externalizing causality and responsibility. Hans Noeldner www.entropicjournal.blogspot.com Oregon, Wisconsin 608-444-6190 "Wealth consists not in having great possessions, but in having few wants." Epictetus
_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
