The post PARKatlanta world (Decatur, Druid Hills: cul-de-sac, fit in, condos)

[bryantm3]

Originally Posted by JPD

So you think someone should get a ticket for going one mile over the speed limit?

Nevermind. I temporarily forgot that there's no extent you won't go to to villainize drivers and forgive everyone that punishes them.

yeah i am pretty sure this is a "we need to teach people not to drive cars in the city" thing. he sees it as an unnecessary choice to own a car, a choice that many people don't make, so anything that discourages people from driving he sees as a plus. he also wants to eliminate most parking from the city. to some degree, he has a point; i believe our entire metro would probably be a lot better off environmentally if cars had never been invented. but he's hiding behind this whole "ticket nazi" thing, which just makes him look like an unreasonable ass even to people who agree with him. he obviously wouldn't favor that lack of leniency in any other domain.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by bryantm3

yeah i am pretty sure this is a "we need to teach people not to drive cars in the city" thing. he sees it as an unnecessary choice to own a car, a choice that many people don't make, so anything that discourages people from driving he sees as a plus. he also wants to eliminate most parking from the city. to some degree, he has a point; i believe our entire metro would probably be a lot better off environmentally if cars had never been invented. but he's hiding behind this whole "ticket nazi" thing, which just makes him look like an unreasonable ass even to people who agree with him. he obviously wouldn't favor that lack of leniency in any other domain.

Dude. I'm right here. Awkward much?

I own a car at the moment and just paid a parking ticket last week I got the other week for being at a meter downtown about five mins late.

[bryantm3]

was replying to cqholt's comments but yours seem to apply also. if you're against parking downtown and want people to take transit, then make a valid argument for it and show people why you're right instead of trying to get car drivers in a half-nelson. logic and persuasive arguments are productive towards the goal you are seeking. encouraging harassment is not.

[jsvh]

The world doesn't work that way bryantm3. There are finite resources. I am all for letting people have a fair choice of getting around how they want but that means ending the subsides for cars such as free parking.

[MattCW]

Originally Posted by jsvh

The world doesn't work that way bryantm3. There are finite resources. I am all for letting people have a fair choice of getting around how they want but that means ending the subsides for cars such as free parking.

Except you don't want to give people a choice. You want to push people out of their cars now before they have a choice.

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by MattCW

Except you don't want to give people a choice. You want to push people out of their cars now before they have a choice.

Exactly. Remove all highways! Remove all parking or make it so expensive that it's impractical! Yeah, it's because he wants more free choice. Yes. That's it.

Who on earth looks forward to more expensive parking? This sounds like someone who got hit by a car once, so now he's made it his life's mission to remove any possibility of someone driving. My favorite quote was in the self-driving cars thread, where he claimed if a human was driving on a road once self-driving cars became widespread, roads might have to be shut down to allow the "dangerous human" to pass. Yeah...something tells me there's a history of something here.

And yes, he wants to take people out of their cars so that they have to make a choice, when choices are not available in the vast majority of the metro area.

[bryantm3]

he's got a point. driving a car is probably the most dangerous thing we do everyday, statistically, but because we're so used to that as a reality we numb ourselves to the possibility of how dangerous it really is to have to pilot a motor vehicle everyday. car accidents are literally the top cause of death of individuals under 45... it's just like cigarettes... in 50 years or so most people will be like "you mean EVERYONE drove a car and they WANTED to? how did they not realize how scary and dangerous it was when the statistics were out there?"

of course the solution to this is not to harass car drivers with petty tickets and nonsense, just like banning cigarettes isn't a good solution to the problem of lung cancer. eventually people will figure it out on their own and make their own choices... the solution is to get the information out there so that everybody actually has the ability to calculate the risk and make that choice for themselves.

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by bryantm3

he's got a point. driving a car is probably the most dangerous thing we do everyday, statistically, but because we're so used to that as a reality we numb ourselves to the possibility of how dangerous it really is to have to pilot a motor vehicle everyday. car accidents are literally the top cause of death of individuals under 45... it's just like cigarettes... in 50 years or so most people will be like "you mean EVERYONE drove a car and they WANTED to? how did they not realize how scary and dangerous it was when the statistics were out there?"

Well of course it is. But, if you want to get people out of their cars, offer alternative options. jsvh appears to want to remove highways and parking and THEN try to figure out other options. It doesn't work that way.

of course the solution to this is not to harass car drivers with petty tickets and nonsense, just like banning cigarettes isn't a good solution to the problem of lung cancer. eventually people will figure it out on their own and make their own choices... the solution is to get the information out there so that everybody actually has the ability to calculate the risk and make that choice for themselves.

I have to make one calculation: I have to get from point A to point B. I either drive, take a taxi/uber, take a bus if it happens to go where I'm going, or take a train, if it happens to go where Im going. In almost every single situation, the car is going to win out until better options are available.

[jsvh]

The only people wanting to remove choice here is the car-nuts. I am not trying to ban anything except government subsidies and mandates for cars that are forcing people into a car dependent lifestyle that do not want it and forcing non-drivers to pick up a very large amount of driver's costs. You are the ones supporting government policy that forces people into car dependency where they have no realistic transportation alternatives.

I am all for highways sticking around if they can pay their way. But like most car infrastructure, I expect there is not. If people are faced with a real choice that includes costs, other options become much more attractive.

Losing a highway or parking is not the end of the world you think it is. Things actually keep moving along without them just fine. I have already given you plenty of examples around the world where they have gone away and the area has been better off.

I am sorry those facts are inconvenient for you. But reality is, you are afraid of a fair choice for cars because you know people would not chose them in many situations which means all this parking and highways we have need to be drasticly reduced to make way for other options people want. Cars are just too expensive, inconvenient, and take up too much space to be used for the vast majority of transportation needs in a major city. Out finite resources and space need to be wisely spent.

Stop the whining and what you want and let the people decide for themselves with real choice. Stop having government force your preference on others.

Here is a good post by a local architect that might give you a good metaphor for understanding the ridiculousness that is government mandated "free" parking: Free Pizza!

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Losing a highway or parking is not the end of the world you think it is. Things actually keep moving along without them just fine. I have already given you plenty of examples around the world where they have gone away and the area has been better off.

You've given examples of where a small portion of one highway was removed. You have provided no examples of a city removing 50 miles of highway and "moving along without them just fine".

In fact, I haven't found a decent city with a less-divided area than Atlanta.

I am sorry those facts are inconvenient for you. But reality is, you are afraid of a fair choice for cars because you know people would not chose them in many situations which means all this parking and highways we have need to be drasticly reduced to make way for other options people want.

You have it backwards. You want to remove the prevailing method, and THEN find other ways. Ways which could take decades to implement, if they ever could get them passed. There is nothing stopping a subway system from being built because cars exist.

This has nothing to do with car users trying to force others to use cars, or trying to remove fair choice. In fact, of all the people here saying that removing highways is dumb, have you asked how many would like to have subways, light rails, bike lanes etc? Pretty much all of them. You have passed the point of rational thought at this point.

Stop the whining and what you want and let the people decide for themselves with real choice. Stop having government force your preference on others.

Build the choices. Simple as that. Don't take away my only choice then tell me to choose. That's pure insanity.