"Our aim, to swat liars and leeches, hypocrites & humbugs, demagogs & dastards"
-- The Yellow Jacket
Moravian Falls, N.C., 1919
Some peoples kids...
Pretty funny. Nice to see the right wing has a sense of humor, unlike the religious left.By the way, about those “enviro-weenie crash boxes” the poster mentioned. That is basically true. A study I read showed that for every one mile per gallon improvement in overall fuel economy, 7000 more motorists will die in highway crashes each year.I do not know how that statistic was developed, but I believe it was based on the assumption that smaller, lighter cars are less crashworthy.
That post is a laugh. The OP at least deals with the issue at hand, even though it is a name-calling type of post. But the commenters certainly haven't been keeping up with the times. They have to be at least 10 years behind the times. But, then, that's where most Montanans are. And I know why there are more accidents: those special victims units the "big" boys drive are too cumbersome for most of them and they are so used to overdriving and running over us in sensible cars that they add to our toll.
My point was that Al Gore, and the other celebs who preach Global Warming are not willing to alter their own lifestyle even a little, but are telling YOU to alter yours.That's not even good socialism, is it?I admit it, I'm a huge offender.Myself, all the branch managers, the DM's, and most of the sales reps drive 3/4 ton SD pickups, and most of them never tow anything.It's nice to be able to hook onto a trailer and pull it, but 90% of the time I don't need a 345 hp pickup.And guess what else, I'm selfish, and really don't have a lot of interest in changing my lifestyle.When the celebs actually start to practice what they preach I'll take another look at it.
Hey, Chuck, how about a law that says everybody must drive identical cars? That would solve your "sensible car" problem, right?You could call it something like "The Fairness in Inertia Act." (You know, give it some nebulous name so nobody would have a clue what it was about.) Basically, the law would require all automakers to make only one kind of car. Every car would be identical everywhere in America--height, width, weight--everything, right down to the paint color. Thus, when two cars crashed into each other, their inertia would be the same, and nobody would suffer unequal damage or injury. (This can also be understood as meaning F=MA.)Naturally, there will be a few selfish individuals like Eric, who will attempt to improve his chance of survival by hiding some extra weight in his car, but the law could have provisions to cover such undemocratic actions. For example, if a driver involved in a crash was found to have more weight in his vehicle than the other driver, such as a load of groceries or a fat mother-in-law, a legal presumption would arise that the first driver was at fault.I know this idea might sound crazy, but you could try it out in California first to see if it worked, then make it a federal law.
Actually, this idea of having one car doesn't make sense to me. But, then, neither does the idea of people who don't need them driving the special victim's units. I have two things I would like to see:1. A requirement that drivers of big rigs, pickups and SVUs have to have a special license. I'm tired of close calls; and 2. A desire that malls, grocery stores, and others who offer parking as well as parking on city streets set aside areas for the big rigs. And I think progressive Montanan should look at the dictionary meaning of progressive. It comes closer to liberal than any other designation other than liberal. Generally it means a Bible belt liberal.
Post a Comment