Re: update: greenhorn versus the $tealer$hip

..p.jm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 14:10:47 +1300, BrianNZ <brian@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

.p.jm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:45:31 +1300, BrianNZ <brian@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

.p.jm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:25:03 +1300, BrianNZ <brian@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

.p.jm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 22:14:38 GMT, Outback Jon
<teammft@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

.p.jm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
So, he's out there on the Taconic ( nice road, used to ride it
frequently myself, both for pleasure and to get to the city ), playing
'Johnny Rocket'. If I recall, the limit there is 65 on most of it.
Maybe 55 -60 in some places, I forget.

He's endangering everyone around him, and I hope he gets
nailed for it sooner rather than later.


Its 55 most places. I think it might go to 65 down near the city. If you've ridden the northern section of it, you'll understand why its only 55. There are roads that just come into it with a stop sign. (Although they have eliminated *most* of the crossroads, some still cross it.) And its two narrow lanes each direction, with no shoulders.
And I can tell you, losing an alternator belt coming back from
the city at night on it is NOT fun, when your lights go to hell :-(
So there you are, endangering everyone around you by driving at night with dodgey lights! Oh, the humanity! What if a child didn't see you and ran from the cornfields (or whatever lines that piece of road!)
Woods :-)
There we go....what if children playing in the woods ran in front of you 'cos the couldn't see you! Endangerment, endangerment!!!
If they are playing in those woods at night, the wolves
already ate them.


And yet when it was your turn to 'what if endangerment', the children in the cornfields were at risk, but somehow when it's turned back at you it's a different set of rules.......why aren't I surprised?

Ummm.... because you're an *** ?

The SAFE thing to do was get the car off that road ASAP, which
is what I did. The available option was to drive it to the next exit,
which I did. There are no shoulders or other places to put a vehicle
there. You got the lanes, and that's all you got.



No driveways, no houses, no watertable? And you parked up as soon as you could and took a taxi home?





And gues what ? I SLOWED DOWN. WAY DOWN. To be SAFER.
Something you're not familiar with.


There is nothing safe about driving at night without lights! You didn't slow down to be safer, you slowed down because you couldn't see whre you were going.....unless this was a well lit up area of woods?!!
Try to make something resembling sense. I know it's hard for
you, but give it a shot.

I'll rephrase for you.

Driving at night without lights is dangerous.

Driving slowly at night without lights is dangerous (and illegal?).

You only slowed down because you couldn't see where you were going.

You were endangering people.

I'll rephrase for you - the vehicle malfunctioned during a
trip. Specifically, a belt fucked up, causing the alternator to not
turn. This occurred late at night on a dark road with no shoulders or
median available to pull off. Anything OTHER than what I did would
have been endangering people.



So driving at night without lights wasn't endangering anyone?

I'm sure you did your best in the situation, but to say you weren't endangering anyone because you justified it to yourself is denial.

Forget the children playing in the woods and think about what an oncoming motorcyclist saw before deciding to overtake......




Nice try, little Kiwi. No cee-gar.



If driving at night slowly without lights was a safety issue it would be in the road rules!......what are the rules about driving at night with no lights?....something like "Don't drive at night without your lights on unless you are .p.jm who is safer when he's driving blind"?

.