Re: OT - Those *#?%$^& Drivers With Cellphones

Dave Hinz <DaveHinz@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



I answered that already. Pulling over in traffic, is more dangerous
than flipping open a phone. This isn't a difficult concept.

And driving down the road yacking, is more dangerous than pulling
over.




And what happens if (Gasp) you happen to be driving through a dead
spot, or all the channels in that cell are in use at that time, when
the call comes in and it doesn't get answered.

Then the _secondary_ on call guy gets called. As a courtesy to your
coworkers, that is a situation to be avoided.

Which takes it from "HAVE" to answer the call, to "Would be nice to".



Never said YOU had to or even should.

Oh, right, you said "could", not "should". Yeah sure whatever,
word-games boy, I'll agree that I could. I also state that I won't.
How's that?

That's fine, I only disagreed that any one HAD to answer a cell call.




No, you haven't. All you did was provide and example of why you think
such a counter example exists.

Seems like a pretty clear counterexample to me.

But apparently ONLY to you.




Yeah and next you will say that a Fifth of scotch doesn't magically
turn some one into a bad driver either.

No, as even you know, that's an entirely different situation.

As other peoples examples show, it isn't. Both are impairing the
drivers. It's drinking the scotch and using the phone that provide
the "magic"



Do you have _anything_ of interest on this topic, or is it just more of
your usual? Don't bother writing a whole bunch if it's just more of the
same, because it's really not worth the effort.

Clearly any disagreement with your rather lame assertions is a hot
button issue for you. And if it's not worth the effort, then STFU, or
else it is.
jk
.