Wednesday, January 07, 2009

Mass Transportation

If you want me to have any interest in "mass transportation" in any form, there are a few minimum requirements you need to meet. These are "needs", not "wishes", by the way.

1) Don't subject me or anyone else to any violations of our privacy. In other words, no metal detectors or "sniffers". No onerous ID requirements. No racial or psychological profiling. No baggage searches or cavity searches. No prohibition of personal weaponry of any sort. Period.

2) Fit my schedule and needs; don't expect me to go way out of my way to accommodate an inconvenient itinerary. I may be willing go be slightly inconvenienced once in a great while, but not everyday.

3) Don't try to turn me into a sardine. I am not averse to being near people, but I also have no desire to have jittery strangers sitting in my lap.

4) Don't develop a partnership with the Enforcers, encouraging them to be a menacing presence on your trips. I don't invite vermin into my house; I do not wish to be forced to share my commute with them.

In conclusion, private vehicles are the most convenient form of mass transit ever developed. To beat them, you will have to do a lot better. Passing "laws" that require me to use your transportation is not "doing it better". If you get your friends in government to do so "for the common good", and then make us run the disarmament gauntlet to get on board, I will personally do all I can to undermine you and your transportation monopoly. Consider that a promise; not that you care.



  1. We used to have a private bus company here but the local gov put it out of business with their own crappy public service one. Nicer buses but all problems you alluded to.

  2. "don't expect me to go way out of my way to accommodate an inconvenient itinerary"

    You mean like a full day layover on a train trip from Philadelphia to Toronto? No shit, I actually ran into that one when planning a business trip and looking for an airline alternative.

    "enemy of false 'authorities' everywhere"

    Um, isn't that phrase redundant?


  3. Oh, I'm no enemy to real authorities (experts). Just the ones who declare themsleves to be "The Authorities".

    My daughter recently spent longer being jerked around by the airlines than it would have taken her to drive to her destination. So, the full day layover is not surprising to me.

  4. Ah, it's a semantic disagreement then. In my lexicon, "experts" are identified by others, frequently correctly; "authorities" are self-proclaimed, nearly always in grievous error...

    The train took about 10 hours to get to somewhere within shouting distance of the US-Canada border, then inexplicably stopped for 20 hours before proceeding. This more than doubled the actual travel time. No doubt this made perfect sense to some goobermint-contracted "authority"...