Just like guns, Seattle government trying to push Ride the Ducks out

The Mayor of Seattle is trying to keep the Ride the Ducks tour buses from operating within city limits until the company’s unsatisfactory safety rating is resolved.

Ed Murray voiced his concern after a report by the state’s Utilities and Transportation Commission found 442 “avoidable violations.” Among Murray’s worries: the suggestion that instead of the tour buses driving on the Aurora Avenue Bridge &#8211 where 5 people were killed and more than 50 injured in September &#8211 they drive on the Fremont Bridge.

The debate over whether operations should resume, and where they should be allowed, caused a bit of a stir with KIRO Radio’s Tom and Curley.

Related: City of Seattle asks state to stop Ride the Ducks from touring again

John Curley: Has anyone in the Seattle City Council said that they would like to see ducks completely go away?

Tom Tangney: No. I don’t think anyone has claimed that. Ride the ducks will never go on Aurora Bridge. Instead it will go on Fremont Bridge … Murray says are you kidding us? That’s even more dangerous; even more people on there. He has no official standing, but he has some weight.

JC: That doesn’t make any sense. Speed across Aurora Bridge at 40 MPH or go across Freemont at 15 MPH. Listen, of the two? There’s no way to control one vehicle running into another. If it’s so dangerous that you can’t let it cross Fremont or Aurora then you strike the entire thing and and don’t let them on the roads. That doesn’t make any sense.

TT: It does make sense. Murray is responsible for safety. And if he doesn’t think it’s safe on Fremont Bridge he has the right to speak up.

JC: He has the right to speak up, but it doesn’t make any sense. It’s a road. Cars travel on that road.

TT: Then why are they offering to not ride on Aurora Bridge? It should be safe.

JC: Either it’s safe or not safe. Either this vehicle is safe or not safe. Usually they restrict vehicles based on gross weight. What are we saying, too many pedestrians on this sidewalk; so you can’t have the Duck because it can veer off the main road and run into the sidewalk and hit somebody?

May I go out on a limb?

(waiting for John to climb out there…)

TT: The city is considering legislation that would give it some authority on routes and who is operating runs. They want to have a say.

(there he is)

JC: Alright! The city doesn’t want the ducks. The city wants the ducks to go away.

TT: Why was that out on a limb?

JC: Because they don’t care about the Duck employees. If it folds and goes away, so what? It’s a nuisance.

TT: So why not just say that?

JC: They can’t say that. They’re not allowed to. You can just create restrictions, so much so that they can hardly operate. The same way they can’t say it’s illegal to sell a gun in the city, but they can put a tax on it to make it tougher on businesses.