So why are you still arguing the same pooe that the road can be dangerous.
Good.
NIP arrived. 949Mark Foster I'm not, that's your bugbnear. I'm saying the same as always, that some...
It doesn't though does it. It simply allows them to pbutt the buck when they crash. By all means investigate the crash and fix the road if it is found be badly engineered but don't call it dangerous. It isn't.
Which is just f***ing stupid. You cannot with any credibility argue that some roads are badly engineered and need to fixed whist at the same time arguing that deliberately restricting sight lines is a good thing.
I understand there is to be an experiment of that nature in London, by the museums? It is not to make the road feel more hazardous, it is to remove the definitions of priority, to blur the distinctions between the domain of the car and the domain of the pedestrian. At no point is the environment itself any more or less dangerous than it was. It is still the drivers, and the pedestrians, that will serve to create any problems.
-- Mark Foster, Brighton, Suslove, UK PGP Fingerprint: 3342 C02C 7BE8 3FE4 AAC5 8BB2 03B7 9263 DDF2 04C1 -------------------------------------------------- "There are no such useless words as...'I didn't have a chance.'" Driving, HMSO
