🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3a08l7$72e@hermes.unt.edu>, msluyter@ponder.csci.unt.edu
(Michael Sluyter) wrote:

>You have it backwards.  It's the *cars* that get in the way of the *bikes*.

This is so silly I'm not going to waste space by refuting it.  Anyone who
thinks a car going 30 mph can get in the way of a bike going 10-15 mph is
beyond reasoning.

>Indeed?  Only one blinded by a false notion of automotive supremacy would 
>insist upon such a narrow interpretation.  

Fancy words, but they are just a false excuse for trying to make
nonsequitur arguments.

>Bikers have (or should have) 
>equal rights/responsibilities in part becuase of the inherent ecological
              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You want equal responsibilities?  That's what I've been arguing for.  So
go down to the county clerk's office and tell them you want to pay a
license fee on your bike.

As for the ecological argument, it doesn't hold up.  Bikers already get a
"green" break because they don't pay gasoline tax.  That's where car
drivers pay for their polluting ways.  Vehicle licensing fees pay for use
of the road.  Even nonpolluting alternate fuel vehicles like electric cars
must be licensed.

                                ++Don Nash

Internet: D.Nash@utexas.edu     The University of Texas System
THEnet:   THENIC::DON           Office of Telcommunication Services