| Re: Critical Mass Tunnel Freaks
Eric S. Sande wrote:
>>Our city has a pretty good system of bike lanes (always room for
>>improvement), and we're about to spend $4 million on the 5.7 mile
>>Lance Armstrong Bikeway.
>
> What a waste of money.
I almost agree since it's only going to be five blocks from a hike and
bike trail that serves the same purpose. The only problem with the
existing trail is all the mud when we actually have wet weather and when
the river overflows and washes out the trail.
That said, we lack a paved east-west route that doesn't have very heavy
(i.e., dangerous) traffic, particularly crossing I-35. Austin's portion
of I-35 is the deadliest stretch of that highway, which extends from
Duluth, Minnesota, near the Canadian border, and runs south all the way
to Mexico. The unsafe crossing problem needed a serious solution. Using
the right of way from the abandoned rail line makes the most sense for
the long term since the city owns the land already.
> I guess that pretty much kills our possible relationship as reasonable
> people.
I don't think so. It has wide support here (and that's among the general
population).
> You are going to have to come to terms with the fact that bicycles
> are vehicles and that bicycle operators are equal under the law with
> other vehicle operators.
What makes you think I've yet to come to terms with that?
> If you have a problem with that then you are going to have to apply
> elsewhere.
Whatever, lol.
> As far as I am concerned Critical Mass represents a threat to the
> cycling community, in that it further serves to marginalise us and
> characterise us as kooks and wastrels.
Agreed, one-hundred percent. If you have a problem with what I wrote
earlier, perhaps you should re-read what I wrote: "This project wouldn't
have received the support it has if it had been left up to Critical Mass
or others whose lawlessness masquerades as 'activism.'" In other words,
the path is being built in spite of their efforts.
> Cyclists, by and large, are solid tax paying citizens who don't
> want dissent but who do want equal treatment under the law.
I never wrote contrary to that.
> We don't want no fargin bike paths, we want a free road and the
> same rights and responsibilities as any other vehicle operator.
I've no problem with the agencies involved funding separate bike paths
through the most traffic addled parts of the city. Most people in my
city don't, either. Not even the CM traffic terrorists.
|