NPS: Ban Cars Now in DC Urban Parks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Hains Point is not some sort of killing ground. I doubt you ever use it, but cars drive pretty slowly in that park. Pedestrians, cyclists and cars seem to do a pretty good job sharing the space.

Your using the death of these two people to advance your agenda is pretty disgusting.

Hains Point was a killing ground for 55-year-old Rhonda Whitaker and 60-year-old Waldon Adams.

Have there been any other pedestrian fatalities on Hains Point in the last 20 years? That would tell us whether this is a systemic problem or one terrible incident with a criminal driver. The road doesn't lend itself to speeding, in my experience.

It obviously "lends itself to speeding," as this incident has shown. And doesn't it bother you in the slightest that there's literally zero news about the driver or charges? Can you imagine any other context where people are recklessly murdered and it's just crickets?

And beyond that, pedestrians and cyclists have the right to their own space. A civilized country doesn't make them jostle with cars in one of the few urban green spaces that exist. That's why Central Park, Prospect Park, and now Rock Creek Park (hopefully) restrict cars.

Have there been other incidents? That's my question. This one was clearly terrible and I hope the driver is fully prosecuted.

Ideally we would look at unsafe conditions (transportation engineers know how to identify those), near misses, and minor injuries/collisions, and then take action based on that. Not wait for people to be seriously injured or die.

DC does not collect info on any of that. They wait until people get killed. It’s disgusting. And NPS is even worse. Don’t expect them to care about you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Hains Point is not some sort of killing ground. I doubt you ever use it, but cars drive pretty slowly in that park. Pedestrians, cyclists and cars seem to do a pretty good job sharing the space.

Your using the death of these two people to advance your agenda is pretty disgusting.

Hains Point was a killing ground for 55-year-old Rhonda Whitaker and 60-year-old Waldon Adams.

Have there been any other pedestrian fatalities on Hains Point in the last 20 years? That would tell us whether this is a systemic problem or one terrible incident with a criminal driver. The road doesn't lend itself to speeding, in my experience.

How many people need to be killed or seriously injured before action is justified, in your opinion? Two people isn't enough, evidently. Would three people be enough? Four? Five? Ten?

The cult of driving DEMANDS blood sacrifice. Do not question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Hains Point is not some sort of killing ground. I doubt you ever use it, but cars drive pretty slowly in that park. Pedestrians, cyclists and cars seem to do a pretty good job sharing the space.

Your using the death of these two people to advance your agenda is pretty disgusting.

Hains Point was a killing ground for 55-year-old Rhonda Whitaker and 60-year-old Waldon Adams.

Have there been any other pedestrian fatalities on Hains Point in the last 20 years? That would tell us whether this is a systemic problem or one terrible incident with a criminal driver. The road doesn't lend itself to speeding, in my experience.

It obviously "lends itself to speeding," as this incident has shown. And doesn't it bother you in the slightest that there's literally zero news about the driver or charges? Can you imagine any other context where people are recklessly murdered and it's just crickets?

And beyond that, pedestrians and cyclists have the right to their own space. A civilized country doesn't make them jostle with cars in one of the few urban green spaces that exist. That's why Central Park, Prospect Park, and now Rock Creek Park (hopefully) restrict cars.

Have there been other incidents? That's my question. This one was clearly terrible and I hope the driver is fully prosecuted.

The driver probably won't be prosecuted at all. How many dead people justify action, for you?

Ok, so it has never happened before. I don't think one incident is a high enough bar to close off Hains Point to a broad range of recreational users who get there by car.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Hains Point is not some sort of killing ground. I doubt you ever use it, but cars drive pretty slowly in that park. Pedestrians, cyclists and cars seem to do a pretty good job sharing the space.

Your using the death of these two people to advance your agenda is pretty disgusting.

Hains Point was a killing ground for 55-year-old Rhonda Whitaker and 60-year-old Waldon Adams.

Have there been any other pedestrian fatalities on Hains Point in the last 20 years? That would tell us whether this is a systemic problem or one terrible incident with a criminal driver. The road doesn't lend itself to speeding, in my experience.

It obviously "lends itself to speeding," as this incident has shown. And doesn't it bother you in the slightest that there's literally zero news about the driver or charges? Can you imagine any other context where people are recklessly murdered and it's just crickets?

And beyond that, pedestrians and cyclists have the right to their own space. A civilized country doesn't make them jostle with cars in one of the few urban green spaces that exist. That's why Central Park, Prospect Park, and now Rock Creek Park (hopefully) restrict cars.

Have there been other incidents? That's my question. This one was clearly terrible and I hope the driver is fully prosecuted.

The driver probably won't be prosecuted at all. How many dead people justify action, for you?

Ok, so it has never happened before. I don't think one incident is a high enough bar to close off Hains Point to a broad range of recreational users who get there by car.

That’s a really gross standard. You’re actually saying you’re ok with more people being killed before you’d consider changing what we’re doing here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Hains Point is not some sort of killing ground. I doubt you ever use it, but cars drive pretty slowly in that park. Pedestrians, cyclists and cars seem to do a pretty good job sharing the space.

Your using the death of these two people to advance your agenda is pretty disgusting.

Hains Point was a killing ground for 55-year-old Rhonda Whitaker and 60-year-old Waldon Adams.

Have there been any other pedestrian fatalities on Hains Point in the last 20 years? That would tell us whether this is a systemic problem or one terrible incident with a criminal driver. The road doesn't lend itself to speeding, in my experience.

It obviously "lends itself to speeding," as this incident has shown. And doesn't it bother you in the slightest that there's literally zero news about the driver or charges? Can you imagine any other context where people are recklessly murdered and it's just crickets?

And beyond that, pedestrians and cyclists have the right to their own space. A civilized country doesn't make them jostle with cars in one of the few urban green spaces that exist. That's why Central Park, Prospect Park, and now Rock Creek Park (hopefully) restrict cars.

Have there been other incidents? That's my question. This one was clearly terrible and I hope the driver is fully prosecuted.

The driver probably won't be prosecuted at all. How many dead people justify action, for you?

Ok, so it has never happened before. I don't think one incident is a high enough bar to close off Hains Point to a broad range of recreational users who get there by car.

the cars are interfering with the users. that’s the problem. do you want to wait for more people to be killed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Hains Point is not some sort of killing ground. I doubt you ever use it, but cars drive pretty slowly in that park. Pedestrians, cyclists and cars seem to do a pretty good job sharing the space.

Your using the death of these two people to advance your agenda is pretty disgusting.

Hains Point was a killing ground for 55-year-old Rhonda Whitaker and 60-year-old Waldon Adams.

Have there been any other pedestrian fatalities on Hains Point in the last 20 years? That would tell us whether this is a systemic problem or one terrible incident with a criminal driver. The road doesn't lend itself to speeding, in my experience.

It obviously "lends itself to speeding," as this incident has shown. And doesn't it bother you in the slightest that there's literally zero news about the driver or charges? Can you imagine any other context where people are recklessly murdered and it's just crickets?

And beyond that, pedestrians and cyclists have the right to their own space. A civilized country doesn't make them jostle with cars in one of the few urban green spaces that exist. That's why Central Park, Prospect Park, and now Rock Creek Park (hopefully) restrict cars.

Have there been other incidents? That's my question. This one was clearly terrible and I hope the driver is fully prosecuted.

The driver probably won't be prosecuted at all. How many dead people justify action, for you?

Ok, so it has never happened before. I don't think one incident is a high enough bar to close off Hains Point to a broad range of recreational users who get there by car.

That’s a really gross standard. You’re actually saying you’re ok with more people being killed before you’d consider changing what we’re doing here.

I'm in favor of putting in a bunch of speed bumps or closing one lane for peds and cyclists and putting up bollards. I'm not in favor of closing the park to cars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Ok, so it has never happened before. I don't think one incident is a high enough bar to close off Hains Point to a broad range of recreational users who get there by car.

OK, so two dead people isn't enough. How about three dead people, would that be enough?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Ok, so it has never happened before. I don't think one incident is a high enough bar to close off Hains Point to a broad range of recreational users who get there by car.

OK, so two dead people isn't enough. How about three dead people, would that be enough?

I'm in favor of putting in a bunch of speed bumps or closing one lane for peds and cyclists and putting up bollards. I'm not in favor of closing the park to cars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Ideally we would look at unsafe conditions (transportation engineers know how to identify those), near misses, and minor injuries/collisions, and then take action based on that. Not wait for people to be seriously injured or die.

DC does not collect info on any of that. They wait until people get killed. It’s disgusting. And NPS is even worse. Don’t expect them to care about you.

Most transportation engineers are terrible at identifying unsafe conditions for people who are walking, rolling, or biking. Unfortunately.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From what I've seen, Hains Point is a pretty popular location for African-American families to have cookouts, usually involving a fair number of people of all ages (from little kids to seniors). Banning cars in this park would make those types of gatherings very difficult, if not impossible.

I'm guessing the people in favor of the ban on cars don't care about that.

Or park and walk? It’s not that hard to figure out a way for everyone to use the space safely. You just don’t need to be able to drive 100% of the park.

And carry all your food, chairs, grills and other stuff you need for a large family barbecue? While dragging little kids and trying to get seniors with mobility issues from the car to the picnic area?

Hains Point isn't Zion or Glacier National Park. People use it for different things, many of which require people to drive into the park. But, I sense there's a disconnect here between people coming from NW to use the park, versus people coming from SE or NE.

You could get a permit for one car to drive per cookout. Sounds good to me. No it’s not zion but it is a park in an urban area, which makes preserving it even more precious.

I'm sure it sounds great to you, because it doesn't create any burden for you. Imposing burdens on other people is one of the easiest things in the world to do.

right, like cars do ALL THE TIME. you want to make the comparative negative externality argument on cars v bikes v pedestrians, let’s go.

We're talking about a very specific location and use. Many people who use Hains Point need to have car access for those uses. People on here are proposing creating burdens on those uses.

The two deaths of pedestrians, though awful, in no way justifies limiting access to Hains Point by people in cars. Limiting such access would result in an entire category of uses becoming much more difficult.

Right? These anti-car fanatics want us to use carts in a park to avoid killing and injuring people. It’s nuts!

I was thinking: we should also be able to park on sidewalks when there’s no other parking available. It’s an undue burden on us to have to park a block away or pay for a garage. They are so selfish!

Hains Point is not some sort of killing ground. I doubt you ever use it, but cars drive pretty slowly in that park. Pedestrians, cyclists and cars seem to do a pretty good job sharing the space.

Your using the death of these two people to advance your agenda is pretty disgusting.

DP: Notice how the.cyclists.are using pedestrian deaths to advance a pro-cyclist (not a pedestrian) agenda. It really is very disgusting. Cyclists don't care about pedestrains. Pedestrians are just pawns in their war with cars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Ok, so it has never happened before. I don't think one incident is a high enough bar to close off Hains Point to a broad range of recreational users who get there by car.

OK, so two dead people isn't enough. How about three dead people, would that be enough?

I don't know. How many Chinese slaves will it take for you to give up your phone? One? Two? Three..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Hains Point is not some sort of killing ground. I doubt you ever use it, but cars drive pretty slowly in that park. Pedestrians, cyclists and cars seem to do a pretty good job sharing the space.

Your using the death of these two people to advance your agenda is pretty disgusting.

Hains Point was a killing ground for 55-year-old Rhonda Whitaker and 60-year-old Waldon Adams.

Have there been any other pedestrian fatalities on Hains Point in the last 20 years? That would tell us whether this is a systemic problem or one terrible incident with a criminal driver. The road doesn't lend itself to speeding, in my experience.

It obviously "lends itself to speeding," as this incident has shown. And doesn't it bother you in the slightest that there's literally zero news about the driver or charges? Can you imagine any other context where people are recklessly murdered and it's just crickets?

And beyond that, pedestrians and cyclists have the right to their own space. A civilized country doesn't make them jostle with cars in one of the few urban green spaces that exist. That's why Central Park, Prospect Park, and now Rock Creek Park (hopefully) restrict cars.

Have there been other incidents? That's my question. This one was clearly terrible and I hope the driver is fully prosecuted.

The driver probably won't be prosecuted at all. How many dead people justify action, for you?

Ok, so it has never happened before. I don't think one incident is a high enough bar to close off Hains Point to a broad range of recreational users who get there by car.

That’s a really gross standard. You’re actually saying you’re ok with more people being killed before you’d consider changing what we’re doing here.

There are objective standards to tell us whether a particular roadway is dangerous. You're the one claiming Hains Point is dangerous for pedestrians. If you're so sure of that, you should be able to provide evidence of your claim.

If your definition of a "safe" roadway is no deaths, ever, then there's no safe roadway in the world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
There are objective standards to tell us whether a particular roadway is dangerous. You're the one claiming Hains Point is dangerous for pedestrians. If you're so sure of that, you should be able to provide evidence of your claim.

If your definition of a "safe" roadway is no deaths, ever, then there's no safe roadway in the world.

No, there aren't. There are subjective standards, for example: one or more serious injuries or deaths in a five-year period. By that standard, Hains Point is dangerous.

As for your second statement, it illustrates how much we in the US accept road deaths as normal and unavoidable. But road deaths are avoidable, and we should not accept road deaths as normal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

DP: Notice how the.cyclists.are using pedestrian deaths to advance a pro-cyclist (not a pedestrian) agenda. It really is very disgusting. Cyclists don't care about pedestrains. Pedestrians are just pawns in their war with cars.

PP, we're all anonymous here. How do you know which of the posts come from people who ride a bike? Let alone who exclusively ride a bike and never, ever walk (assuming that's even possible)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There are objective standards to tell us whether a particular roadway is dangerous. You're the one claiming Hains Point is dangerous for pedestrians. If you're so sure of that, you should be able to provide evidence of your claim.

If your definition of a "safe" roadway is no deaths, ever, then there's no safe roadway in the world.

No, there aren't. There are subjective standards, for example: one or more serious injuries or deaths in a five-year period. By that standard, Hains Point is dangerous.

As for your second statement, it illustrates how much we in the US accept road deaths as normal and unavoidable. But road deaths are avoidable, and we should not accept road deaths as normal.

By that standard bicycles should be banned as well. Just so you know.