Originally Posted by
Machka
To ask you why you think this is relevant for more than just a small handful of people. Back to Post 19 again. IMO you're trying to create a solution for a problem that doesn't exist.
But ... maybe you can provide statistics to show that this is a significant problem.
Machka, you may not realize it but what you are doing is creating conditions for me (or anyone else) to put an issue on the table by saying that it's irrelevant to do so without jumping through the hurdles of finding supporting statistics, etc. What I've been trying to do is explain how this is a valid topic WITHOUT jumping through such hurdles. Why? Because I believe it is. Now are you going to try to reduce my belief that it is to some arbitrary subjective point of view of a single individual? Probably, because you for some reason refuse to comprehend general reasoning without reference to popular sovereignty in the form of statistics or some other representation of arbitrary collective opinion.
Also, I said the following with the qualifier ... "if I were the senator you're trying to convince" …
See post
#45 .
If you genuinely think that there is a problem and that you've got a solution, and if you genuinely want to convince someone/anyone to implement a solution, you've first got to produce evidence that there is a problem. If you can't produce evidence that there is a problem no one is going to want to go through all the fuss, hassle, and bother of implementing a so-called "solution".
Do some research ... come up with statistics ... put together some surveys and polls.
If you have some reason to block an idea that would allow private property owners to share their land with bike campers WITHOUT paying insurance companies, government permitters, etc.; you're doing a good job of trying to get me to shut up about it. Why can't you see that people have the right to raise issues and pursue policies without jumping through the kinds of hoops you set up? Free speech doesn't require a special permit, the use of statistics, or anything else you keep insisting on. Democratic participation isn't supposed to be filtered by technocracy in this way.