There Is No "War On Cars"

Comments

1
The "war on cars" is propaganda, pure and simple. Turn anyone who suggests doing things in a new way (even if they drive cars!) into an enemy to be attacked and destroyed. Pile money on anyone who screams "THEY WANT TO SOCIAL ENGINEER YOU OUT OF YOUR CAR" to keep them in office. Sorta like screaming "they're after your kids!" or "job-killers!".

The "war on cars" is a distraction and a shameful attack on our goals of a greener future made for every Seattle citizen, from those who walk everywhere to that awesome car covered in old floppy discs on through to tall bikes, skateboards and even that stunning yellow H2 that I see around in impossible parking spaces (bravo, driver!).

Let's not live in a city where anyone who bucks the status quo is an enemy.
2
GAH DAMM IT YOU PROMISED A WAR ON CARS. I WANT MY WAR ON!
3
agreed, thanks for deescalating the rhetoric Ben
4
Apparently Cornell has now figured out that there is no provision in Seattle's city charter for recall, because he has been very silent for almost a week.
5
There's no war on cars.

We just make 6 lanes of highway traffic funnel into 2 lanes and then wring out hands about all the "traffic problems".

Then we build a Convention Center straddling the obvious bottleneck so it can never be fixed.

Then we "remedy" the situation by proposing low cost light rail.

Then we spend $20 billion planning and not building it.

Then we spend an order of magnitude higher per mile building it.

Then we go bankrupt building it and can't build any more.

The traffic remains bottlenecked.

But there is no war on cars.

And if you say so, I'll down shout you and call you names.
6
i'm sending this from inside of my car, just to be safe. here, i feel safest of all.
7
Do you what we need a war on? Crows! One of those fuckers dive-bombed me today!

War! On! Crows! War! On! Crows!
8
"bicyclists are militant and looking to cause a conflict whenever they can."

Thats basically how I see these Critical Mass "parades" every Friday night. When they gather more people for a Sunday "parade" through the neighborhood, the endgame is often the same. Since there was no signs posted a week in advance indicating there would be a "parade", the driver obviously didnt prepare to take detours, so the car quickly gets trapped trying to get out of their neighborhood. They honk their horn and are immediately surrounded by cyclists who start slaping the cars roof or hood" and the driver freaks out fearing for their safety or property and ends up hitting one or two cyclist just to escape. Seems to be a broken record on these Sunday "parades".

Also, the deep bore tunnel, if this was a 3 billion dollar light rail tunnel, SCAT/PSN/SLOG/SIERA/CASCADE/Mayor wouldn't have a problem with it. They would welcome the investment in mass transit, but since its being used for cars & trucks, its suddenly an obscene waste of tax payer money (even though were spending 18 billion for light rail).
9
Since when do losers get billions of dollars in support like more roads and bailouts? If it's a war then the cars are winning at the expense of people.

Such a stupid concept.
10
What's the #1 killer of children, teenagers, and adults under 40 in Seattle, King County, Washington State, and the United States?

Whatever it is, we should probably have a war on that.
11
The War on Cars is just as real as the War on Christmas, and the War on Christians. They all deserve equal consideration.
12
Where can I sign up as a foot soldier in this war?

Will I get to drive a tank?
13
@11 I love you for that. It makes kinison @8 sound like Bryan Fischer.
14
@7 War on caws!
15
@14 oh my gawd
16
People making $500 car payments and spending another couple of hundred a month on insurance get furious when talk comes around to transit and walking and biking. You know the type, right? The kind of person who lives on pork & beans to drive a Corvette? The kind of person who thinks only losers take the bus?

Hell, yeah, there's a war on cars and I want to lead a division!
17
The War on Cars would be kind of a cool band name.
18
Green Lake is two words.

And #17 is completely right.
19
Also, this guy Cornell is a Realtor in North Seattle. You'd think he'd be more careful of his brand than to affiliate with such a reactionary lie.
20
People riding bikes get furious when talk comes around to licensing them. You know the type, right? They focus on paying a fee. But in reality it would be a good way to ticket those that break the law and make the rest look bad. Nope they want to ride anonymously so that they can run stop signs and lights tying up traffic.
All vehicles on the road should follow traffic laws and without an endorsement and a plate there is very little reason for a bicyclist to follow them.

21
There is a War on Cars, a War on Christmas, and a War on Christians.

Well, as long as by "war" you mean "I dislike and would rather see gone but I am too peaceful and lazy and busy living my own life to actually do anything but look down on."
22
@20:
All vehicles on the road should follow traffic laws and without an endorsement and a plate there is very little reason for a bicyclist to follow them


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZHathcQR…

I think the chip on the shoulders of people that forget that they are wrapped in hundreds of pounds of metal is incentive enough. What you're bothered by is little more than annoying scofflaw activity.
23
@22,

Tell that to my stepmother who was put in a coma by a bike messenger.
24
@23 I've had a very similar problems as well...my uncle was put in a coma by a UPS truck.
Also, my cat was run over by a St. Bernard delivery-dog yesterday trying to deliver some much needed brandy across town.
Down with all delivery services!
25
@23: Yes, that's exactly like all those folks biking to work or a little kid meekly pedaling down the street.

With all due respect to your stepmother, your reaction is incredibly insulting and borderline irrational. I think she's owed an apology for your crass and opportunistic abuse of her misfortune.
26
The only war on cars is by Council and the Governator, who insist on a LOWER capacity Deeply Tolled Tunnel instead of cheaper HIGHER capacity alternatives like Surface Transit or a Rebuilt Viaduct.

Yes, the Surface Transit has a HIGHER car and truck capacity than the Tunnel of Tolled Terribleness.

Kind of surprising, but you can get lower pollution, lower cost, and higher vehicle capacity by not digging insane holes in the glacial till and vacuoles and silt.
27
There Is No "War On Cars"

Apparently, Baconcat didn't get that memo.
28
@22

Are you showing a video of a car breaking the law to support an argument that bikes shouldn't have to obey traffic laws? What?
29
Right - it's just a war on the people who rely on cars. Which, as far as Seattle work commutes go, was about 68% of them at last count.
30
You're too late Ben. You guys can pretend that you're not fighting this war but its bullshit. You can pretend that fighting the tunnel is about x but the simple truth of the matter is that you don't believe in spending that much money on a project catering to cars because you think the future of modern life is one that doesn't include the automobile.

And that's fine.

Just be honest about it.

I'm so goddamn sick of watching you guys thinking you can just sneak this enormous social change under the radar and not have to answer for your true intentions and ideologies. It doesn't matter how righteous your cause is, it's still shitty public leadership.

Be honest with the people.
31
#30: Surface/transit people who want to build 8 lanes of free highway (6 surface highway + 2 expanded I-5) instead of 4 tolled lanes (deep bore tunnel) don't want to accommodate the automobile. Because they want a streetcar or something thrown in. Oooookay.
32
Maybe so many people think there's a war on cars BECAUSE THERE IS A WAR ON CARS ... despite wartime propaganda to the contrary.
33
@25,

The motherfucker was breaking the law when he mowed her down. I demand an apology for your crass stupidity.

@24,

Interesting how I didn't complain about the existence of bike messengers so much about bicyclists breaking the law and hurting/killing pedestrians. Pathetic attempt there, asshole.
34
@30: As cited in this post, the majority of people support more complete streets that provide for all modes of transportation. That includes cars. If you're against this, you're in the minority. Put your grown-up pants on and deal with it.
35
@34,

Yeah, then ask them about removing lanes to make room for bicycles, and that "majority" disappears toot sweet.

36
@29 - And imagine if 100% got to work by car. How would that work out, congestion-wise?

If I were a general in the war on cars, my strategy would be to eliminate transit.
37
@30 "Be honest with the people", like you "Solar System" WTF? Have the balls to at least make up a name when you are chastising for having the balls to state their opinion WITH THEIR NAME ON IT. What a tool...
38
@37

I'm sorry that you apparently disagree with my desire for people who are in the position of making/influencing public policy to be honest about their true intentions rather than poorly attempting to play politics.

I'm really not sure why I need to identify my real name to express that desire other than the likely scenario that you'd like nothing more than to spend your evening googling me so you could come up with "dirt" to create personal attacks against me in an attempt to discredit my opinion.

Weird. Really, really weird.
39
There is one of two things going on here.

The people fighting the war on wars are too stupid to realize they're fighting a war on cars (incredibly unlikely)

Or

The people fighting the war on cars think the public is too stupid and/or afraid of change to understand the need for a war on cars (incredibly likely)

Make it clear that the war is in fact on cars and that its not a war on drivers or commuters and the people will get it.

People don't get it right now. It's not because they are too stupid. Stop thinking that and stop treating people that way. They are ignorant. There's a huge difference.
40
War on wars is war on cars. Derp.
41
TVDinner @34 -- Before you graduate to big boy pants, you'll need to learn a bit about reading poll results - question wording, question order, screens, top lines, crosstabs, poll memos, statements of methodology.

This one is not to be taken too seriously.

Just scratching the surface, the questions presented as #'s 1, 2 and 3 in the press release are #'s 11, 12 and 13 in the crosstabs - out of an allegedly 11-question poll.

When it comes to defining "the majority", I'd put more stock in the SUSA poll this one was ginned up to contradict.