|
The Ontario Ban-wagon... where can i get off? (pg. 10)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| FunkyCrew |
| quote: | Originally posted by exstasie
What's wrong with the green bin in the house? most people keep the small bin in the house and then put it in the big green bin.
|
because it will stink up the place, and our cat will sure try to get it's paws on all the food bits
people with houses just stick them in the garage, I don't know anyone who actually keeps it in the kitchen, unless it's a general garbage bin |
|
|
| exstasie |
| quote: | Originally posted by FunkyCrew
because it will stink up the place, and our cat will sure try to get it's paws on all the food bits
people with houses just stick them in the garage, I don't know anyone who actually keeps it in the kitchen, unless it's a general garbage bin |
Most people i know keep in the kitchen. Like under the sink because it is like another garbage bin. All of the leftover food and stuff like that goes in there.
The bins are actually pretty good at keeping the smell out. You never notice anything until you actually open it up and try and smell it. And then when its full you bring it outside. Do condos have separate shoots for the green bin recycling or do they not do it at all...
|
|
|
| FunkyCrew |
| quote: | Originally posted by exstasie
Most people i know keep in the kitchen. Like under the sink because it is like another garbage bin. All of the leftover food and stuff like that goes in there.
The bins are actually pretty good at keeping the smell out. You never notice anything until you actually open it up and try and smell it. And then when its full you bring it outside. Do condos have separate shoots for the green bin recycling or do they not do it at all...
|
nope
we only have the general garbage shoot, where everything not in the blue bin goes to, and I will continue doing so
I believe the green bin is the most un-hygenic invention ever.. and it stinks the most down where our recycling bins are in the parking lot level, I literally have to hold my breath until I'm done putting my other recycling out, yuck |
|
|
| Orko |
I think the point about enforcing pedestrian/bike laws vs car laws, is a bit different than people are thinking.
IMO the reason to crack down MORE on drivers is because of the relative damage they can do with the car. As it has been stated, drivers have a lot of protection around them:| quote: | - Seatbelts
- Airbags
- Crumple zones
- Pre-crash systems
- Energy-absorbing windshields
- Defensive driving (can break this down into several points)
- Etc.
|
If a driver is careless and hits a pedestrian, the walker gets owned, while the driver is ok. Almost the same thing on the bike. When a biker hits a car, or hits a walker, the level of damage done is very different. This is the exact reason I have a problem with being REQUIRED to bike on the road. The relative momentum difference between a bike vs. car, is so much greater than a bike vs. person.
Yes, a pedestrian could run in the way, cause a driver to swerve, which sends them into a store front, or other similar scenarios. But, my point remains that drivers have a greater duty of care because of the greater amount of damage they can do with their vehicles.
I really do wish that cops would enforce the dangerous driving laws. But alas, when I am standing on the street corner, waiting to cross, and I see a car run a red light, with a cop car right there, 7/10 times the cop is either on the phone or looking at one of their screens. If pedestrians could enforce the law against cops, then we would be set. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
But by putting most of the onus on drivers, pedestrians and bike riders have shunned off most of their own responsibility and it's clearly evident upon passive observation. If the threat of being crushed by a 2 tonne car or 5 tonne bus isnt enough of a deterrence then you should be responsible for your own actions when you have no business being there in the first place. If you DONT have the right of way and get hit then its your own damned fault, plain and simple.
If you get run over when you have the right of way then the car driver should be charged as is. But i have a problem with drivers paying for the carelessness of others as well as the blatent disregard for the law and safety that many pedestrians and bicyclists have in Toronto.
Im sick of the third party blame mentality that most canadians tend to display and these days actually demand. It's disheartening to see that no one wants to take responsibility for their own actions, choices, lifestyles etc. |
|
|
| Yohan |
| I have zero problem giving no liability for drivers hitting people/bikers jaywalking or otherwise breaking the pedestrian laws |
|
|
| MarkT |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
The fines are 500-1000 dollars. As if this isnt about revenue generation. Give me a break.
So what about cops and their cell phones? Or the computers they use that are way more distracting than anything we have. Arent they a danger as well? Should we be avoiding cops when driving to protect our children from possible inattentive police drivers?
How about passengers? Perhaps we should put sound proof barriers up so that passengers cannot talk to the driver? Where does it end? Seriously?
As for the garbage situation they are actually going after the private trash collectors and fining them because the city is losing money. I say scrap the blue box system and hire these guys for free. A lot more would get done for a lot less. But hey, free enterprise, independence, innovation and efficiency are not the ways of the nanny state. |
you repeatedly make ridiculous slippery slope analogies...
a cop on a radio or using their computer during the course of their job, particuarly for an emergency response situation, is different than a person having a conversation on a cell phone while driving. one is necessary...the other is not.
if it's a requirement of your job to drive a lot and take/make calls while doing so, then you (or your employer) can invest in a hands-free sysetm for your car. simple.
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
pedestrians dont do much to protect themselves as it is. They strut across the road without looking or caring that a car is coming because it's their "right". I dont care what the law says, i always make sure that im not about to get run down by two tonnes of steel whether i feel i have the right to be there as a pedestrian or not.
pedestrians (and bike riders for that matter) need some lessons on how to share the road. |
are you ing kidding? nice generalization on pedestrians "strutting" across the street whenever they feel like it, lol.
so the law for right-of-way is effectively irrelevant, and pedestrians should yield (even when crossing on a green or crosswalk), because cars are 'bigger'?
for someone *so* high on individual rights, you've really lost it here.
I'd expect you to be crusading against ty drivers whose carelessness, distraction and negligence kills people on a daily basis (other drivers, pedestrians, etc). |
|
|
| smuncky |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
I'd expect you to be crusading against ty drivers whose carelessness, distraction and negligence kills people on a daily basis (other drivers, pedestrians, etc). |
but that's not as fun as bashing mcguinty or miller.
somtimes i wish an official would be elected that jay likes. look at how many less threads were started that involve federal politics since the tories came to power. |
|
|
| infinity HiGH |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
if it's a requirement of your job to drive a lot and take/make calls while doing so, then you (or your employer) can invest in a hands-free sysetm for your car. simple.
|
what happens when they move to ban hands free sets since studies find that those devices are a distraction as well?
And how do you know that the conversation that a person is having on their phone isn't a "necessary" one? Sure most people just talk about bull gossip stuff; but other times there are important phone calls. Eg. business-related. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
are you ing kidding? nice generalization on pedestrians "strutting" across the street whenever they feel like it, lol.
so the law for right-of-way is effectively irrelevant, and pedestrians should yield (even when crossing on a green or crosswalk), because cars are 'bigger'?
for someone *so* high on individual rights, you've really lost it here.
I'd expect you to be crusading against ty drivers whose carelessness, distraction and negligence kills people on a daily basis (other drivers, pedestrians, etc). |
first off i see carelessness every day and its due to my cautious driving that these people are still alive.
Second dont put words in my mouth. I have clearly stated that anyone who runs over a pedestrian or bicyclist should be charged IF THEY HAD THE RIGHT OF WAY including crosswalks or green lights. However even at these intersections i advise those on foot to be cautious anyways as no matter what the law states, the car will always win. Good advice that mama taught me.
I have then stated that if THEY DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY either the pedestrian or bicylist should be charged, or there should be no charges at all.
Are you telling me that you disagree with the above? |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by infinity HiGH
what happens when they move to ban hands free sets since studies find that those devices are a distraction as well?
|
It will happen and the antis will have their excuses for that too |
|
|
| MarkT |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
first off i see carelessness every day and its due to my cautious driving that these people are still alive.
Second dont put words in my mouth. I have clearly stated that anyone who runs over a pedestrian or bicyclist should be charged IF THEY HAD THE RIGHT OF WAY including crosswalks or green lights. However even at these intersections i advise those on foot to be cautious anyways as no matter what the law states, the car will always win. Good advice that mama taught me.
I have then stated that if THEY DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY either the pedestrian or bicylist should be charged, or there should be no charges at all.
Are you telling me that you disagree with the above? |
re-read your own quote. your slant is clearly against pedestrians. yes, I agree that everyone should face the consequences of their own negligent behaviour.
sure, there are careless pedestrians...but if they get hit (due to their own negligence, distraction, whatever), that will be their problem. they are not 'endangering' anyone but themselves with their negligence. if a car hits them because they're not paying attention, who 'wins'? the car.
if a driver is negligent and hits a pedestrian, who wins? the car (again).
therefore, there needs to be more regulation with regard to negligent drivers (who can harm others) than negligent pedestrians (who harm only themselves). |
|
|
|
|
