Re: OOIDA's take on the "texting' law
- From: gpsman <gpsman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 00:35:16 -0800 (PST)
On Jan 29, 9:47 pm, CCBlack <ccblack...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
gpsman wrote:
motor carriers and commercial drivers are
regulated by the feds, and the states, according to the constitution,
must be left alone to regulate the remainder<>"
Wow ... you finally made a point ... and not a bad one at that.
Irrefutably.
And therein lies the core issue, to which I have pared if you won't be
"netcopped" to it.
The ban is inevitable, and for commercial drivers must be defined and
imposed by federal decree.
This is a matter of more closely defining the law and its exceptions
by the unusual imposition of law which duplicates points contained
within law already in existence but must contain that for that which
the exemption is allowed, which couldn't be more effectively
irrelevant to you.
It could not have any less effect on you or anyone else, beyond being
exempted according to more certain conditions.
Therefore, your loss of bodily functions has no basis in reason.
-----
- gpsman
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: OOIDA's take on the "texting' law
- From: CCBlack
- Re: OOIDA's take on the "texting' law
- References:
- OOIDA's take on the "texting' law
- From: Roughrider50
- Re: OOIDA's take on the "texting' law
- From: CCBlack
- Re: OOIDA's take on the "texting' law
- From: gpsman
- Re: OOIDA's take on the "texting' law
- From: CCBlack
- Re: OOIDA's take on the "texting' law
- From: gpsman
- Re: OOIDA's take on the "texting' law
- From: CCBlack
- Re: OOIDA's take on the "texting' law
- From: gpsman
- Re: OOIDA's take on the "texting' law
- From: CCBlack
- OOIDA's take on the "texting' law
- Prev by Date: Re: Whee!
- Next by Date: Re: another blow to truckers.......no texting!
- Previous by thread: Re: OOIDA's take on the "texting' law
- Next by thread: Re: OOIDA's take on the "texting' law
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|