frank theriault wrote: > On 9/28/06, keith_w <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Why IS that, Frank? >> Other than the fact that one recently laid you up fairly well, that is!
> Nah, that's got nothing to do with it, Keith. Besides (hard to > believe) it's been a year now! The accident was Oct 6, 2005. Amazing! I hope you're all mended by now. > In all seriousness, I have nothing against cars. Well, not much, anyway. > > In fact, I rather appreciate them from time to time. One day, if I > ever make enough money, I'd love to buy an old English sports car to > take out on lovely sunny summer afternoons. My all time fave would be > the Austin Healey Bugeye (Frogeye to you Brits) Sprite. Back when I was piloting a Triumph TR-3 around (1957 or so) the Sprite first came out. Our sports car club met at an A.H. dealership in town. I remember that first delivery, that the head mechanic bought on the spot. It was the *members* that were bug-eyed that night! Yeah, I'd always sort of wanted one of those too... > I'd also like > a Mazda Miata as a backup, for when the Sprite's in the shop (or as a > friend of mine who used to own a Big Healey called it: "Healey > Camp"). > > I actually go places from time to time in cars owned by friends and relatives. > > What I'm against the the needless use of cars. Daily commutes when > transit's available. Those 5 block drives to the corner store to buy > beer. Well, you're right there! I have a small Mom & Pop store 4 blocks away. I have walked it many times, but not enough, I'll admit. A lot of the problem, with me at least, is that my calendar is way too full to take the time for errands that would take 8-10 minutes by car, but over 30 minutes by bike. Not to mention the aggressive drivers here that will actually try to run a two-wheeler off the road if you're thought to be an impediment to their trip to wherever... I've been moved over when I was on a big motorcycle that is quite maneuverable and very visible... Still, close calls a-plenty. > We have to understand that cars are bad for the environment. > Because each individual car doesn't appear to do much harm, it's all > to easy to say, "Oh well, this one little trip won't make a > difference." - but when hundreds of millions of drivers each day say > that, the affects are huge. > > Anyway, I don't mean to prosteletyze (but I guess I am). > > I'm not anti-car, I'm pro "alternative transportation" (although > perhaps we should stop thinking of walking, mass transit and cycling > as "alternatives" - maybe motor vehicles should be the alternatives). > > cheers, > frank A fine answer, Frank. Reasonable and right. For you. All depends on where you live and your life style, doesn't it? If you happen to live in a city/community that has excellent public transportation, if you're not married or have a steady...etc. There are especially times in inclement weather (you certainly know about that!) that one needs covered transportation. For convenience, if not for your health! Yes, there are alternatives in a city with good transportation. Unquestionably. A blown apart city like Los Angeles, with good distances between everything, requires you either grossly restructure your life to avoid the need to drive an IC-engined vehicle. Our public transportation covers the more popular corridors pretty well. But, many of the places you (I) want to go are well off that/those corridors... I think I could function very well in London or a London-styled city. Public transportation there is pure joy to a Los Angelean! <grin> Thanks for the words... keith whaley -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
