A trashy lefty post in the face of Craig Garret.
You probably don't know Craig Garret. At least the Craig Garret I am talking about. You might know a Craig Garret and there is nothing wrong with that. Except if he is the Craig Garret who wrote in this week's NOW a letter that I am going to quote in extenso here: 'Please do some research before suggesting such moronic ideas in the future like reducing the speed limit to 30km/h. The assumption that speed limits (sic) are the prime cause of accidents or even a cause has been shown to be incorrect many times over. You'd better watch it: keep printing drivel like this and people will start to assume you're just a trashy lefty pulp rag.'
Winston Churchill once said that the best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. If Craig Garret is the average voter, I for sure agree. Maybe he (Craig, not Sir Winston) is only a lost soul seeking attention in which case there is no point commenting on his nonsenses. But in case he represents even a minority of today's Torontonian trend of thinking, I feel that it would too bad not to mention it in my blog. So, yes, Craig, research has been done, everywhere in the world. And everywhere in the world the same clear, overwhelming, obvious result was obtained: higher speed means more victims on the road. OK Craig, you didn't mention victims but accidents. And I can admit -even though I don't think so-that speed is not the prime cause of accident. Because scratching your car while turning left at an intersection and hitting a car that is going straight through counts as an accident. And obviously a 30km/h speed limit would not have avoided this particular accident. Now if the speed of both colliding car is over 30km/h, the collision takes place at over 60 km/h. And what happens Craig if you have a collision at over 60 km/h? Don't try. You might regret it. Also if you have children (is it a good idea?), maybe one day you'll thank the caring people who fought to limit the speed. Not for their benefit, not for their pleasure, not for their amusement but to save the life of your kids (I'd rather imagine you don't have kids). Is caring for the safety of your children a leftist value? Don't answer. I am not really talking to you.
Winston Churchill once said that the best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. If Craig Garret is the average voter, I for sure agree. Maybe he (Craig, not Sir Winston) is only a lost soul seeking attention in which case there is no point commenting on his nonsenses. But in case he represents even a minority of today's Torontonian trend of thinking, I feel that it would too bad not to mention it in my blog. So, yes, Craig, research has been done, everywhere in the world. And everywhere in the world the same clear, overwhelming, obvious result was obtained: higher speed means more victims on the road. OK Craig, you didn't mention victims but accidents. And I can admit -even though I don't think so-that speed is not the prime cause of accident. Because scratching your car while turning left at an intersection and hitting a car that is going straight through counts as an accident. And obviously a 30km/h speed limit would not have avoided this particular accident. Now if the speed of both colliding car is over 30km/h, the collision takes place at over 60 km/h. And what happens Craig if you have a collision at over 60 km/h? Don't try. You might regret it. Also if you have children (is it a good idea?), maybe one day you'll thank the caring people who fought to limit the speed. Not for their benefit, not for their pleasure, not for their amusement but to save the life of your kids (I'd rather imagine you don't have kids). Is caring for the safety of your children a leftist value? Don't answer. I am not really talking to you.
Zoning diet
Zoning in Toronto gives a good idea of what the law of the jungle is like. Or chaos. I already mentionned in 'deconstruction' how you cannot see lake Ontario from anywhere in downtown Toronto, even though Toronto is more or less built on a basin which is pretty much like a theater which stage is lake Ontario, which happens to be one of the largest lake in the world. But the forest like array of buildings makes it impossible to see the stage, wherever you are seated in the theatre. Except maybe from the very first row, which is not anymore front street, nor even harbourfront, but the most recent line of high-rises that have been built on the lake in front of the others. Yes, Toronto is building on the lake, like they do in Japan or in other countries where they have no space. Except that it is taking place in Canada where space is the cheapest commodity. Even in Toronto where empty spaces are everywhere. Like in the east for exemple. Not far in the east. Just a little east of Union Station, where all of a sudden high rises cease to exist and are replaced by a desert where the highest buildings are churches, like in the good old days. And where you suddenly realize that there is a lake after all in this city. And even beaches. Sand beaches. Don't tell this to someone who is living at Bay and Front, he will not believe you. And that is only one misdeed of the mad berserk blind boar who is in charge of zoning in Toronto. Basically, any abandonned house, any parking, any garden can suddenly be transformed into a 30+ stories high-rise regardless of the consequences on the neighbouring heritage building, family houses or even other high-rise which condos were sold featuring a beautiful picture showing the proud tower alone in the sky above all the pettiness of the crawling crowds and which ends up being constricted between four higher buildings with a mirror image of itself as sole view. Sic transit gloria mundi.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
