U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-06-2014, 12:33 AM
 
Location: Oakland, CA
27,165 posts, read 29,655,359 times
Reputation: 26646

Advertisements

I just find it really sad that too many people thing dealing with "the public" in "public spaces" is risky so they'd rather avoid it at all costs. It goes hand in hand with the lack of compassion we have, as a society for people who are not like us. Because we never see them, interact with them or talk to them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-06-2014, 12:37 AM
 
2,941 posts, read 3,857,480 times
Reputation: 1439
Quote:
Originally Posted by jade408 View Post
I just find it really sad that too many people thing dealing with "the public" in "public spaces" is risky so they'd rather avoid it at all costs. It goes hand in hand with the lack of compassion we have, as a society for people who are not like us. Because we never see them, interact with them or talk to them.
No, it is called personal safety. People not like me, no problem. People not like me who are violent, big problem. That woman on the bus was the same race as me, just crazy. Giving a wonderful diatribe about how no man would ever do it with her(eweh!). She was not just sitting there quietly talking to herself(which I used to run into a bit in the pre-Bluetooth days).

I also don't think the woman she slugged would rate safety while using transit high again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2014, 05:26 AM
 
2,824 posts, read 3,348,447 times
Reputation: 3030
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
The death in New Brunswick was because the guy was a moron looking over to see if the train is coming, that is an extremely dangerous thing to do for this reason. But really that is a freak accident more than anything else.
Transit death. Bystanders injured too. As for the "moron" comment, I'm sure that's the way many folks view the deaths of bicyclists riding on roads designed for motor vehicles.


Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
As for how many accidents happened when people were on their way to a park and ride is a strawman argument because that is like trying to blame traffic accidents on aviation because the accident happened while someone was driving to the airport to fly somewhere.
You missed the point entirely.
If your argument is that "fewer people die using transit therefore transit is preferable to motor vehicle as a mode of transport" the argument is fallacious. Transit isn't "to the doorstep" and therefore people often have to take a car and drive to a "park and ride" in order to use the transit. Transit doesn't "save lives" because it isn't eliminating car usage for those riding transit. Your argument is the "strawman" argument because it is based on a false presumption.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2014, 06:07 AM
 
Location: Mt. Airy
5,311 posts, read 5,328,925 times
Reputation: 3562
Quote:
Originally Posted by Linda_d View Post
Your question is disingenuous. People have been killed or seriously injured by muggers while most car accidents do not result in deaths or life threatening injuries.
How is it disingenuous? Are you saying there are even half as many death by muggings via transit as there are death by motor vehicle accident?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2014, 07:03 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,509,053 times
Reputation: 7830
Quote:
Originally Posted by chirack View Post
While I am fortunate to never have been a victim of crime while riding, I have had a tape recorder thrown at me on an bus by a crazy woman. Seen two purses snatched while I was a kid. Saw a crazy woman try to push someone the tracks. The crazy woman who threw the tape recorder at me actually slugged another woman in the rail station. I have seen one poor crazy young man throw a punch at an the ticket agents both with a person inside(luckily he ignored me and went straight into the train, I just waited while the police hauled him out...I wasn't going to get into that train with him on it.)

I know people who have had attempted pickpocketing. Not to mention a few un-pleasant things like having a guy who is high on something and sweating profusely sit next to you. I would say that being in an car would have avoided much of that. Oh and the crazy people I mentioned are the minority who turned violent. However last time I rode I did run into one who was just agitated. Most crazy people are not violent, but yeah that is one of many dangers.
Sometimes bad things happen in life, driving in Jersey I come close to being in accidents regularly.

If you don't like transit, biking, or walking just say so instead of trying to make up excuses why everyone else shouldn't like it either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2014, 07:09 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,509,053 times
Reputation: 7830
Quote:
Originally Posted by IC_deLight View Post
Transit death. Bystanders injured too. As for the "moron" comment, I'm sure that's the way many folks view the deaths of bicyclists riding on roads designed for motor vehicles.




You missed the point entirely.
If your argument is that "fewer people die using transit therefore transit is preferable to motor vehicle as a mode of transport" the argument is fallacious. Transit isn't "to the doorstep" and therefore people often have to take a car and drive to a "park and ride" in order to use the transit. Transit doesn't "save lives" because it isn't eliminating car usage for those riding transit. Your argument is the "strawman" argument because it is based on a false presumption.
I see you missed me pointing out your strawman argument, you cannot combine an accident that happens with someone driving to and from a park and ride on transit because that is like blaming an accident on flying because you were driving to the airport when you got into an accident.

Also bikes are allowed on the roads, it is important for a city to design infrastructure that makes biking and driving safe for both, and requires drivers to pay attention of their surroundings. Now when people break the law while biking in traffic, then yes that is stupid, just like it is stupid when people driving run red lights and stop signs, turn down the wrong way of a one way street, speeding and excessive lane changing, and so on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2014, 07:50 AM
 
2,824 posts, read 3,348,447 times
Reputation: 3030
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
I see you missed me pointing out your strawman argument, you cannot combine an accident that happens with someone driving to and from a park and ride on transit because that is like blaming an accident on flying because you were driving to the airport when you got into an accident.
No I didn't "miss" your erroneous remark - that's what prompted the response. No one is "combining" the accident or trying to attribute such an accident directly to transit.

The error you make over and over again is presuming that transit inherently results in fewer deaths. It does not. Transit is hawked as transportation for the masses but transit is wholly incapable of solving the ultimate need of getting from start to destination for virtually everyone. Even if it provides transportation for part of the route, folks often have to take cars to get to or from a location where they would have access to transit. An intent to use transit for some part of a journey hardly insulates the prospective or actual riders the rest of the trip. Repeatedly refusing to acknowledge the simple reality that undermines your strawman argument simply makes the lack of logic in your argument obvious to others.


Quote:
Also bikes are allowed on the roads, it is important for a city to design infrastructure that makes biking and driving safe for both, and requires drivers to pay attention of their surroundings. Now when people break the law while biking in traffic, then yes that is stupid, just like it is stupid when people driving run red lights and stop signs, turn down the wrong way of a one way street, speeding and excessive lane changing, and so on.
Based on your logic the bicyclist's problems would be solved if he/she had simply planned to use transit for part of the route.

Culling season is nearly year round. It's fairly nonexistent except during those "gathering festivals" at the "gathering places" you are so fond of.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2014, 07:53 AM
 
Location: Youngstown, Oh.
4,893 posts, read 7,654,530 times
Reputation: 4508
Quote:
Originally Posted by jade408 View Post
I just find it really sad that too many people thing dealing with "the public" in "public spaces" is risky so they'd rather avoid it at all costs. It goes hand in hand with the lack of compassion we have, as a society for people who are not like us. Because we never see them, interact with them or talk to them.
Thanks! You expressed this much more tactfully than I would have.



FWIW, I feel much safer riding transit, than riding with someone in their car.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2014, 08:01 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,509,053 times
Reputation: 7830
Quote:
Originally Posted by IC_deLight View Post
No I didn't "miss" your erroneous remark - that's what prompted the response. No one is "combining" the accident or trying to attribute such an accident directly to transit.

The error you make over and over again is presuming that transit inherently results in fewer deaths. It does not. Transit is hawked as transportation for the masses but transit is wholly incapable of solving the ultimate need of getting from start to destination for virtually everyone. Even if it provides transportation for part of the route, folks often have to take cars to get to or from a location where they would have access to transit. An intent to use transit for some part of a journey hardly insulates the prospective or actual riders the rest of the trip. Repeatedly refusing to acknowledge the simple reality that undermines your strawman argument simply makes the lack of logic in your argument obvious to others.


Based on your logic the bicyclist's problems would be solved if he/she had simply planned to use transit for part of the route.

Culling season is nearly year round. It's fairly nonexistent except during those "gathering festivals" at the "gathering places" you are so fond of.
Well, when you make comments about people who get into accidents that take park and rides are somehow the fault of transit, then I can only believe that you are trying to associate something you can't prove to transit.

Actually no, it is easy to create safe routes for bike commuting, as well as it I'd easy for drivers to pay attention to their surroundings. Look before you turn.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2014, 08:15 AM
 
9,520 posts, read 14,819,994 times
Reputation: 9769
Quote:
Originally Posted by jade408 View Post
I just find it really sad that too many people thing dealing with "the public" in "public spaces" is risky so they'd rather avoid it at all costs. It goes hand in hand with the lack of compassion we have, as a society for people who are not like us. Because we never see them, interact with them or talk to them.
This is because people, in general, are terrible. I get on the train on Friday and there's one old woman talking on the phone in a very loud voice, so I have to switch cars just so I can read in peace. There's always several people having conversations on their phones so you can hear them several rows away, people with their headphones similarly loud, people who put stuff on the seats next to them or in the aisles, people with kids who are running around and/or screaming, or blocking the aisles with their strollers.

Get to the subway and it just gets worse. Along with the cell-phone-talkers, loud-headphones, and free-range-kid bunch, you've got the panhandlers, the religious solicitors, the subway "performers" (another kind of panhandler really), homeless people who sleep on the seats and stink up the cars, general crazy people, etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top