HiesenbergWhat's Wrong?

When somebody does something that effects other rational beings negatively without compensating them

And that's about that. Everything written below is a variation on that theme. Quite often people lie, intentionally or subconsciously. People are inconsistent and often deaf to reason. whatever. This list will never be complete

  • Parking on pavements. Like cars don't take up enough fucking room already
  • Putting bins on pavements. I understand the bins have to be put out every fortnight, nevertheless why not put them on the road? It is unfair that the pedestrian should have to pay all the costs of this habit. 50% each would be a start.
  • Pedestrians always having to give way to motor traffic. 50% each would be a start.
  • 90% of Street Lighting. Street lighting genearlly doesn't make things safer. It does however cause light pollution and considerable expense in errection and maintainence
  • 90% of Traffic Lights. Traffic lights genearlly don't make things safer. They do however cause light pollution and considerable expense in errection and maintainence, along with delays, added pollution and behavioural modification.
  • Getting a boner on about cyclists riding two abreast. The hight of inconsistency in that no driver flips of oncoming traffic or parked vehicles which prevent them getting to the tobacconist 10 seconds quicker.
  • Having a period about cyclists riding on pavements. Look, I'm not advocating dangerous cycling here. What I am saying that there are many situations when it makes sense for the cyclist and society in general to tolerate this illegal activity. We can always debate where to draw the line, but I know that line is considerably south of a cyclist riding up a hill on an unused pavement in order to allow a large stream of traffic to get past, thus saving time, pollution and the other raft of negative aspects of crawling motor traffic.
  • Getting a stiff-on about cyclists shooting red lights. Once again, can I stress, niether I, nor the significant majority of people who endorse breaking the law in this context advocate any behaviour which unfairly imposes costs on others. But, goodness, do folk hate cyclists shooting red lights! The same people don't bat an eyelid at pedestrians crossing at a red signal when there is no traffic for miles around, so if a cyclist shoots a red light and by doing so saves himself time, makes himself safer, saves the time of other road users, makes other road users safer, why worry? Win win situation. I have shot a red light and been chased by the police. Were they to persue car drivers on my same journey who exceed speed limits and overtake me illegally and too closely with the same vigour. If I shoot a red light I consider It far more carefully than people give me credit for (I actually don't want to die, believe it or not) and do not endanger other road users. Not so for even the safest driver in the world. This may be subjective, but the biggest danger for a cyclist shooting a red light light is generally car drivers who use their vehicles to make a point about it.