Out in the Farmington Valley, if they're not trying to pass laws get bikes off the road, they're actively trying to run kids over. See here.
(Disclaimer: I think it is very important to walk facing traffic.)
(Disclaimer 2: I don't doubt the sincerity of the writer and her wish not to see people run over. I just think she totally missed the problem with the streets in Avon.)
8 comments:
Use your real name you friggin troll. Ha! Double ha!
When I hear "The Valley" referred to by someone in CT, I can only think of the lower Naugatuck Valley. (Please, no jokes.)
That valley is too far away from Hartford.
Classic. She's terrified of hitting someone, so rather than own that, she would rather be angry at others than at herself. Easier to blame some kid for using the road -- which he is entitled to do -- than to grow some ova, endure the honking of other drivers, and slow the fuck down.
Well, it's the only "The Valley" that matters. (To me, at the very least.)
It's interesting to think what thirteen years away from the third-smallest state does to ones sense of distance. In 2000, I would have definitely thought the 50 miles between The Valley and Hartford was "far". Now I live in a state where it can take two weeks to bike to the far side of it.
I'm sure the Naugatuck Valley hates bikes as much or more than the Farmington Valley.
Connecticut used to have all the way out to the end of Ohio right after the Revolutionary War, but it realized it's not the size of the state in the fight, but the size of the fight in the state.
True, "The" Valley is not that bike friendly. But we...er, they do have one big bike claim to fame: the first "bicycle" was built and ridden there, Lallement's velocopede back in 1865.
Man, could you imagine if CT kept the Western Reserve? Cleveland in Connecticut? Yeesh.
CT cities are probably on par with Cleveland.
I almost went to Oberlin. Maybe I would have gone if they gave me in-state tuition.
Oh wait, no such thing.
Post a Comment