[*BCM*] Meaningless Labelling (was: Scooters in the bike lanes)

[Jeremy Chase]

I understand what you are saying about the small scooters, but I
think the argument about pollution is trumped by a number of
benefits scooters have over autos:

1) Scooters use far less fuel
2) Scooters aren't nearly as much a danger to pedestrians or cyclists (as cars)
3) Scooters don't contribute to traffic congestion nearly as much as cars

Personally I wouldn't want a scooter at CM either, but my reason for not
wanting them there would be because riding it around in the mass would
simply be a waste of fuel.

Jeremy


On 9/27/07, Jym Dyer <jym at econet.org> wrote:
> > Any logical CMer knows that a scooter is a much better
> > alternative to a car, but the far left are going to disagree
> > with anything you do if it isn't pedal power.
>
> =v= Oh please.  "The far left" is a meaningless label and is
> not the opposite of "logical."  Dispense with the labelling
> and insinuations and focus on something with actual substance.
>
> =v= Because they are not subject to the same regulations, many
> scooter engines actually pollute as badly as car engines do.  So
> any logical AND ALSO WELL-INFORMED CMer, regardless of political
> leaning, is not going to be wild about riding with a motorized
> device spewing toxic exhaust into their lungs.
>     <_Jym_>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Boston Critical Mass mailing list
> list at bostoncriticalmass.org
> http://bostoncriticalmass.org/list
> To unsubscribe email list-unsubscribe at bostoncriticalmass.org
>