Hybrid Car – More Fun with Less Gas

What abt Mt Best fridge? - Page 61

register ::  Login Password  :: Lost Password?
Posted by Dale E on August 27, 2007, 4:02 pm
 


Balanced View wrote:




http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&qth+percentile+speed+limit&btnG=Google+Search


Posted by no spam on August 27, 2007, 6:03 pm
 

How many injuries are required before the government should start
restricting the free use of something?  If the government had more control
on ladders my neighbor might not have spend over a year out of work and have
a huge hospital bill.  He fell off a ladder and landed on a clothes dryer,
bounced off it onto a concrete floor.  Now his family is suffering because
of government inaction.  How many more children must suffer before you do
something to make sure something like this never happens again?!?!?  Sounds
silly when you look at it that way doesn't it?



So!  What does that have to do with you?  If you work on one and think its
smart then wear the heart hat.

But you are doing the standard liberal thing, failing to answer the question
put to you.  Therefore I will put it to you again:  What right do you or
anyone else have to tell me how to live my life?

Now please just try to answer that when it comes to keeping me "safe" from
my own actions.



FORCED to install them. . .why was that?  To protect people who were too
stupid to demand them.  You have proven that there were cars available with
them that the smart people could buy.



If you buy a new car in the US you will be forced to buy a lot of things in
and on your car.  You may or may not want some of the stuff buy you have NO
choice in the matter.



Hum. . .I guess there are dozens of race car drivers dieing every year.  I
guess big racing is just hiding that fact.  The point still stand, many
times a year a race car hits a concrete wall doing well over 100 mph and the
driver climbs out of the car and walks away under his own power.  Do a
youtube search and I'm sure you can see some video of racing accidents that
would have killed someone driving any car out there on the commercial
market.  I guess its just fancy editing when they show the driver walking
away.



But if the car was built correctly then very few, if any, of these stupid
people would have to die.  Isn't that what you want from the government, to
protect them?  After all smart people do not need the force of law to make
them do smart things.  The stupid people do, unfortunately in doing so the
government takes more and more control of your life.

********************************************************
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
********************************************************

I noticed you failed to answer this question, did you miss it?  I'll
highlight it so you will notice it this time.



Now you just completely invalidated your very own "Laws are based on
reasonable risk." statement.  I'm willing to bet you could not find 10
separate accidents in the US in any one year where anything like that
happened.  IOW, the risk, or chance as you call it, is so low as to be
statistically nonexistent.  Therefore the seatbelt laws are NOT based on any
type of reasonable risk to you or anyone other than the person taking that
risk.  As an adult I think you should have the right to take that risk if
you wish.  Whereas you seem to think that you know what is best for everyone
and think the government should stop people from exercising any right you
think is a bad thing.



Posted by Balanced View on August 27, 2007, 11:01 pm
 no spam wrote:

As I said before, its a matter of risk. If as many people fell off
ladders as were injured in vehicle something
would be done. You are just taking the matter to silly extremes, as do
many posting about their rights and
government control.

I haven't, you can live your life anyway you want as long as it doesn't
impact other people. You climb a mountain
and get stuck we all end up paying to save you.

Because the "Free market" you types so loudly support couldn't give a
rats ass about safety, and yes people
did start to demand safer cars .

Like what? Most cars today have a huge range of options, list one thing
that you don't want in your car.

They die in crashes all the time, or are seriously injured, here you go:

Deaths in Grand-Am

    * Jeff Clinton, Homestead-Miami, March 2002

[edit] Deaths in NASCAR Winston Cup/Nextel Cup (since 1971)

    * Friday Hassler, Daytona, February 1972
    * Larry Smith, Talladega, May 1973
    * Tiny Lund, Talladega, August 1975
    * Ricky Knotts, Daytona, February 1980 (qualifying race)
    * Bruce Jacobi, injuries suffered in a 1983 wreck at the 125-mile
qualifying races at Daytona (he would remain in a coma until he died in
1987)
    * Terry Schoonover, Atlanta, November 1984
    * Baldwin, Rick, injured during qualifying attempt at Michigan in
1986, succumbing in 1997.
    * Grant Adcox, Atlanta, November 1989
    * J. D. McDuffie, Watkins Glen, August 1991
    * Neil Bonnett, Daytona, February, 1994 (in practice)
    * Rodney Orr, Daytona, February, 1994 (in practice)
    * Kenny Irwin, Loudon, July 2000 (in practice)
    * Dale Earnhardt, Daytona, February 2001, Daytona 500

[edit] Deaths in NASCAR Busch Series (since 1982)

    * Clifford Allison, Michigan, 1992 (in practice)
    * Adam Petty, Loudon, 2000 (in practice)

[edit] Deaths in NASCAR Craftsman Truck Series (since 1995)

    * John Nemechek, Homestead-Miami, February 1997
    * Tony Roper, Texas, October 2000

[edit] Deaths in NASCAR Modified Series

    * Richie Evans, Martinsville, 1985 (in practice)
    * Charlie Jarzombek, Martinsville, 1987
    * Tom Baldwin, Thompson International Speedway, 2004

[edit] Deaths in NASCAR Sportsman Series

    * David Gaines, Charlotte, May 1990
    * Gary Batson, Charlotte, May 1992
    * Russell Phillips, Charlotte, October 1995

[edit] Deaths in Auto Racing Club of America

    * Gene Richards, Talladega, July 1982
    * Ken Kalla, Talladega, May 1983
    * Francis Affleck, Daytona, January 1985
    * Tracy Read, Talladega, July 1987
    * Slick Johnson, Daytona, February 1990
    * Chris Gehrke, Talladega, May 1991
    * Chad Coleman, Atlanta, August 1998
    * Scott Baker, Toledo, June 2000
    * Blaise Alexander, Charlotte, October 2001
    * Eric Martin, Charlotte, October 2002 (in practice)


The point is my friend from the very beginning is that laws protect US
from stupid people, as  they tend
take others with them.

I suggest you look it up as you are the one who thinks it doesn't
happen. Ejection from the vehicle is one
of the most injurious events that can ­happen to a person in a crash. In
fatal crashes in 2004, 74 percent of
passenger vehicle occupants who were totally ejected from the vehicle
were killed.



Posted by no spam on August 28, 2007, 9:29 pm
 
So that's your number.



Again I'll point out that what is seen as extreme today may well become law
tomorrow.  Examples that I have given: government control of your toilet and
your diet.

What is next?  What kind of car or home you may buy?



First off, a mountain rescue is a long way from wearing a hard hat.  Second,
are you saying that we should ban mountain climbing?  Third, how is me not
wearing a hard hat impacting anyone other then me?  Fourth, using your line
of thinking doesn't someone falling off a ladder impact you?  Fifth, are you
saying that money trumps a person's rights?



BTW, you failed to answer the question, again.  What right do you have to
tell me what I need to do to be safe?  Are you going to tell me what I can
eat because my diet might lead to me getting sick?



That's right, its about making money.  If a safe car sells better than a
unsafe car that means people want to drive unsafe cars and just who the heck
are you to tell them they can't?



You are contradicting yourself.  Which is it did the free market fail or
not?



For me the more options the better!!  But what if I were a 90 pound 60 year
old woman and want to make sure that my neck isn't broken by the air bag in
a slow speed wreck therefore want a car w/o an air bag?



I don't know about how the other NASCAR cars are equipped so I only counted
the Cup and Bush series.  Using your own numbers in the past 30 (THIRTY)
years there has been a total of 13 deaths.  (FYI, in 2003 there were 417
people killed falling from ladders.  That's about 3208% more.)  In the last
30 years how many drivers, I won't even include passengers, have been killed
in cars that are traveling much slower who could have lived if the
government had required all cars to be built to protect the drivers like
NASCAR requires their cars to be built?

Two points.  One, if you want the government to protect you and those around
you should not they protect you to the utmost?  Two, who gets to decided
what is the right thing?



Not in large numbers but what about cases where that can not be said.  Say
the requirement for lawn mowers to have blade breaks on them.  Just how does
some moron putting his hand under a running lawn mower going to "take others
with them"?


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Can't come up with an answer to that one?



Are you deliberately trying to avoid you own arguments?  You say on one hand
that the laws are to protect others from the stupid people and imply that
people being tossed from cars are causing accidents which causes others to
be killed or injured.  When I point out to you that such a thing almost
never happens you go back to worrying about the individual being killed.
Which is your the base of your argument, protecting the stupid person from
himself or protecting others from stupid people?



And why were they ejected?  In most case it was because they made a choice
not to wear a seatbelt.  As an adult are they not permitted to take such a
risk?  If you think not what other risk should a competent adult not be
allow to take?  Climbing a ladder?  Remember in 2003, 417 people DIED (no
telling how many were injured) in that activity.



Posted by Balanced View on August 29, 2007, 4:11 pm
 no spam wrote:

I say what I say and don't imply anything else. In the case of your hard
hat, if you are injured it will require the
services of your fellow workers who rush to your aid, leaving machines
untended and possibly risk their own lives
to save yours.

Quit trying to imply I said anything of the sort. I said laws are
enacted to protect stupid people and the rest of
us from their actions.

What? What you've just stated is bassacwards

The free market initially had nothing to do with it, the American car
makers cried poor and said it couldn't be
done.

That can be addressed by the dealer, my grandmother is four foot 9 and
they set her up in a car that fit her.
safely.

No, you are deliberately avoid my cites that back up what I say. If you
don't buckle up you are stupid, a
hazard to everyone else in the car and those outside.

It just backs up what I've be saying all along, the stupid are a hazard
to those around them. Stats prove beyond
any doubt that people who don't buckle up are a hazard to everyone else
in the car and those outside, as are
those that don't follow building codes, build bonfires in a drought
zone, drink and drive, shoot varmints from a
moving vehicle. etc.etc.etc..............



This Thread
Bookmark this thread:
 
 
 
 
 
 
  •  
  • Subject
  • Author
  • Date
please rate this thread