Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
Plus, if you ever want to excuse an action you just scream "safety" and everyone immediately falls lockstep and apologizes for even questioning it.
Pedestrian: This design seems arbitrary.
City screams: SAFETY!
Pedestrian: Oh geez I never knew, how could I be so stupid. Sorry for asking.
City: hehehe, that worked well, idiot.
There are tonnes of stories about warning blitzes. Might not make it here though.
|
And I'm looking at this as the lesser of two evils. They are DEMOLISHING a building, an inherently dangerous thing to do. Sure, they COULD build a covered sidewalk, but what do you think the reaction would be if there was an accident during a pedestrian rush? Do you really think a covered sidewalk is all that much protection? Something happens, the sidewalk collapes. Dozens are killed, over a hundred are hurt...how much you wanna bet folks start screaming for the construction company's head, and lambaste the City for "not doing enough to protect us!?".
Or, the construction company can close the sidewalk, inconvenience a lot of folks by making them walk a few extra meters a day, and if something happens and someone decides to walk along their protective wall and gets squished, they have no liability, as "they shouldn't have been there in the first place."
I think I'd go with Option 2, to be sure.