| Re: Critical Mass Tunnel Freaks
In article <Jym.wzy8llcji1.fsf@econet.org>,
Jym Dyer <jym@econet.org> writes:
>> If I actively participate in Critical Mass, I'd be an
>> hypocrite for not living up to my own lights. If I
>> don't participate, I'm an hypocrite for just giving it
>> lip-service support.
>
> =v= Do you participate in traffic?
Yes, actually. And I think 'participate' is a good word for it.
> Traffic is, after all,
> an event where widespread lawbreaking occurs.
I assume when you say 'traffic', you mean motor vehicle traffic.
I've done some lawbreaking, myself. But while I'm certainly
no letter-of-the-law saint putting a foot down at every stop
line or signalling every turn, I do endeavour to keep my own
transgressions limited. That's just my own, self-applied
approach, without any officiousness directed at anyone else.
My focus isn't so much on law as on /order/, in terms of
co-existing and cooperating with the all other people in the
traffic. So I personally feel sort of incompatible with the
Critical Mass approach. That's not a criticism directed
toward anyone or anything. I'm not /com/plaining; I'm just
/ex/plaining.
> It is far
> more destructive and deadly than any bike ride could be.
> =v= Critical Mass, with all its human flaws,
I have no criticisms toward Critical Mass. In fact I like
that it exists, and I see no more human flaws in it than
in any other form of, or forum for, expression. But my own
conscience would give me a kick in the ass if I rode through
a red light, and I can't get the damn thing to shuddup.
> is a much
> better implementation of traffic.
I figure the best implementation of traffic is that which
allows people to get to work or the shops, or deliver/receive
goods or services as fairly, undestructfully and safely as
possible. Of course, some things have to be changed and some
awareness has to be raised in order for that to happen.
cheers,
Tom
--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
|