Originally Posted by
aaronechang
This a very auto-centric way of looking at things, no?
If it is ok to use eminent domain to build more roads (presumably so that cars can use them), why would it not be suitable to use it to create transportation options for cyclists and pedestrians?
You can argue that eminent domain should not be used in any case, but to allow it for building more roads but not for non-automobile use seems to me to be emblematic of the problem that we've all been struggling with - that very few people (outside of the cycling community, at least) view bikes as viable transportation.
Why do you think that roads belong to automobiles? A road is multi-use and can be used by automobiles, bicycles, and pedestrians alike, when designed properly. I assert my right to use the road on my bicycle and you should too. Eminent domain is terrible and roads are a special case where usually it can't be done by just purchasing the land. You always have a holdout you can't go around.