Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

The D-SLR as an Intimidatation Tool to Bad Drivers

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 6, 2005 10:37:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I walk my kids to school every morning, 2 blocks, amid a sea of Honda
Odysseys, Toyota Siennas, and assorted SUVs. There are two intersections
with crosswalks, where at least several times per week, some driver, usually
a parent driving their kids to school (some of which live closer than we do
to the school) fails to yield to kids entering the crosswalk. I have tried
various approaches to dealing with this.

1. I request enforcement from the local sheriff (we contract with the county
sheriff for police services). This works on the days they show up, but is
not a practical solution.

2. I have a crossing-guard stop sign, that I use, and an air powered boat
horn, but these are cumbersome to carry, and embarass my kids.

3. I have angrily thrown things at cars that do not stop, but this is bound
to get me into trouble.

So one day I decided to carry my D-SLR with me, and take pictures of
vehicles that do not yield the right of way. This has proven to be quite
successful. It totally freaks out the moms to have their car photographed
blocking the crosswalk, and they appear to be cured of this offense. On the
three occasions where I have done this, either that same day, or a few days
later, the driver will see me walking and confront me. This morning was a
classic, as the mom was complaining to me about people walking to school
impeding traffic.
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 6, 2005 10:37:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Owamanga (not-this-bit) wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 18:37:11 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf"
> <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote:
>
> >I walk my kids to school every morning, 2 blocks, amid a sea of Honda
> >Odysseys, Toyota Siennas, and assorted SUVs. There are two intersections
> >with crosswalks, where at least several times per week, some driver, usually
> >a parent driving their kids to school (some of which live closer than we do
> >to the school) fails to yield to kids entering the crosswalk. I have tried
> >various approaches to dealing with this.
> >
> >1. I request enforcement from the local sheriff (we contract with the county
> >sheriff for police services). This works on the days they show up, but is
> >not a practical solution.
> >
> >2. I have a crossing-guard stop sign, that I use, and an air powered boat
> >horn, but these are cumbersome to carry, and embarass my kids.
> >
> >3. I have angrily thrown things at cars that do not stop, but this is bound
> >to get me into trouble.
> >
> >So one day I decided to carry my D-SLR with me, and take pictures of
> >vehicles that do not yield the right of way. This has proven to be quite
> >successful. It totally freaks out the moms to have their car photographed
> >blocking the crosswalk, and they appear to be cured of this offense. On the
> >three occasions where I have done this, either that same day, or a few days
> >later, the driver will see me walking and confront me. This morning was a
> >classic, as the mom was complaining to me about people walking to school
> >impeding traffic.
>
> Cool.
>
> Have you set up a hall-of-shame gallery on pbase yet? Then you can
> pass around little business cards with the URL on to any parents that
> are interested...
>
> --
> Owamanga!
> http://www.pbase.com/owamanga

The Hall of Shame, or Wall of Shame (depending on where can can post
the photos) is a good idea of how to deal with this.

If the offenders are parents of the children attending the school, you
may be able to get the school to let you post hard copies of the photos
somewhere in the school on a "Hall of Shame" or "Wall of Shame" to get
the offenders to tow the line.

Peer presure can do wonders in a case like this. Becky, Johnny, Fred,
are not happy in class because their mother or father is on the wall of
shame for not yeilding to the students crossing the street.

Now, this does present problems for the students in the school, and
dealing with peer presure. Not sure if you want to go there.

roland
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 6, 2005 10:37:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Steven M. Scharf wrote:

> a parent driving their kids to school (some of which live closer than we do
> to the school) fails to yield to kids entering the crosswalk. I have tried
> various approaches to dealing with this.

Have you noticed a cellphone correlation?


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Related resources
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 6, 2005 10:37:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"I walk my kids to school every morning, 2 blocks, amid a sea of Honda
Odysseys, Toyota Siennas, and assorted SUVs."

Did you choose to live in a part of the world where people own such
things, or did it decay around you?
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 6, 2005 10:37:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

>I guess it is my own fault.

I was just chatting with an old friend who bought 5 acres and a (albeit
very humble) house in upstate NY for, are you sitting down? $2,300.
That's two thousand, three hundred dollars.

I've been looking for anything decent in or near Tucson AZ for under a
quarter million, and failing to find it.
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 6, 2005 10:37:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
news:rJ0pe.202$VK4.175@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> I walk my kids to school every morning, 2 blocks, amid a sea of Honda
> Odysseys, Toyota Siennas, and assorted SUVs. There are two intersections
> with crosswalks, where at least several times per week, some driver,
usually
> a parent driving their kids to school (some of which live closer than we
do
> to the school) fails to yield to kids entering the crosswalk. I have tried
> various approaches to dealing with this.
>
> 1. I request enforcement from the local sheriff (we contract with the
county
> sheriff for police services). This works on the days they show up, but is
> not a practical solution.
>
> 2. I have a crossing-guard stop sign, that I use, and an air powered boat
> horn, but these are cumbersome to carry, and embarass my kids.
>
> 3. I have angrily thrown things at cars that do not stop, but this is
bound
> to get me into trouble.
>
> So one day I decided to carry my D-SLR with me, and take pictures of
> vehicles that do not yield the right of way. This has proven to be quite
> successful. It totally freaks out the moms to have their car photographed
> blocking the crosswalk, and they appear to be cured of this offense. On
the
> three occasions where I have done this, either that same day, or a few
days
> later, the driver will see me walking and confront me. This morning was a
> classic, as the mom was complaining to me about people walking to school
> impeding traffic.

I'll have to carry my Rebel XT with me to work. I walk to work every day
and even though the local police have sporadically focused on motorists who
don't stop for crosswalks no one ever stops, even when there is a cop
sitting there. And here in California ANY intersection is considered a
crosswalk.

Greg
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 6, 2005 10:37:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne wrote:

> It and nother studies showed that even hands-free devices do not help
> things very much.

http://www.reason.com/hitandrun/2005/01/are_cell_phone....

Bottom line: cellphone use can cause an accident, but in the grand
scheme of things, it's barely detectable.
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 6, 2005 11:12:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 18:37:11 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf"
<scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote:

>I walk my kids to school every morning, 2 blocks, amid a sea of Honda
>Odysseys, Toyota Siennas, and assorted SUVs. There are two intersections
>with crosswalks, where at least several times per week, some driver, usually
>a parent driving their kids to school (some of which live closer than we do
>to the school) fails to yield to kids entering the crosswalk. I have tried
>various approaches to dealing with this.
>
>1. I request enforcement from the local sheriff (we contract with the county
>sheriff for police services). This works on the days they show up, but is
>not a practical solution.
>
>2. I have a crossing-guard stop sign, that I use, and an air powered boat
>horn, but these are cumbersome to carry, and embarass my kids.
>
>3. I have angrily thrown things at cars that do not stop, but this is bound
>to get me into trouble.
>
>So one day I decided to carry my D-SLR with me, and take pictures of
>vehicles that do not yield the right of way. This has proven to be quite
>successful. It totally freaks out the moms to have their car photographed
>blocking the crosswalk, and they appear to be cured of this offense. On the
>three occasions where I have done this, either that same day, or a few days
>later, the driver will see me walking and confront me. This morning was a
>classic, as the mom was complaining to me about people walking to school
>impeding traffic.

Cool.

Have you set up a hall-of-shame gallery on pbase yet? Then you can
pass around little business cards with the URL on to any parents that
are interested...

--
Owamanga!
http://www.pbase.com/owamanga
June 6, 2005 11:12:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Owamanga wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 18:37:11 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf"
> <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote:
>
>
>>I walk my kids to school every morning, 2 blocks, amid a sea of Honda
>>Odysseys, Toyota Siennas, and assorted SUVs. There are two intersections
>>with crosswalks, where at least several times per week, some driver, usually
>>a parent driving their kids to school (some of which live closer than we do
>>to the school) fails to yield to kids entering the crosswalk. I have tried
>>various approaches to dealing with this.
>>
>>1. I request enforcement from the local sheriff (we contract with the county
>>sheriff for police services). This works on the days they show up, but is
>>not a practical solution.
>>
>>2. I have a crossing-guard stop sign, that I use, and an air powered boat
>>horn, but these are cumbersome to carry, and embarass my kids.
>>
>>3. I have angrily thrown things at cars that do not stop, but this is bound
>>to get me into trouble.
>>
>>So one day I decided to carry my D-SLR with me, and take pictures of
>>vehicles that do not yield the right of way. This has proven to be quite
>>successful. It totally freaks out the moms to have their car photographed
>>blocking the crosswalk, and they appear to be cured of this offense. On the
>>three occasions where I have done this, either that same day, or a few days
>>later, the driver will see me walking and confront me. This morning was a
>>classic, as the mom was complaining to me about people walking to school
>>impeding traffic.
>
>
> Cool.
>
> Have you set up a hall-of-shame gallery on pbase yet? Then you can
> pass around little business cards with the URL on to any parents that
> are interested...
>
> --
> Owamanga!
> http://www.pbase.com/owamanga


Kewl! A citizen's version of the Stop Light Cam with a public web
interface. If it's good for the goose....

--
jer email reply - I am not a 'ten'
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 12:09:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Owamanga" <owamanga(not-this-bit)@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:h889a1p9o0vk5hp0sl372vsuqkdegkc4ui@4ax.com...

> Have you set up a hall-of-shame gallery on pbase yet? Then you can
> pass around little business cards with the URL on to any parents that
> are interested...

Excellent idea. A few years back, someone set up a web site called the
"Highway 17 Hall of Shame" with photos of bizarre things that drivers were
doing. It was even featured on CNN!
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 12:14:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

<rbehunin@alumni.weber.edu> wrote in message
news:1118087041.061549.234050@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

> The Hall of Shame, or Wall of Shame (depending on where can can post
> the photos) is a good idea of how to deal with this.
>
> If the offenders are parents of the children attending the school, you
> may be able to get the school to let you post hard copies of the photos
> somewhere in the school on a "Hall of Shame" or "Wall of Shame" to get
> the offenders to tow the line.

Unfortunately, the present school administration at this school is
unconcerned about the safety issue of kids walking or cycling to school. The
previous principal was the opposite, he would stand outside in the morning
lecturing parents, and directing traffic. We get a new principal next year,
and we'll see if she is any better.
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 12:19:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <rJ0pe.202$VK4.175@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
"Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote:

> I walk my kids to school every morning, 2 blocks

Without reading a SINGLE reply, I'll respond...

Unless the two block distance traverses a high crime rate area or the children
must cross an UNcontrolled, BUSY street, you should STAY HOME. You are doing
a disservice to your children, particularly if they are a little older.

Having dear, ole Dad personally escort his little darlings a mere two blocks,
especially if most or all of their peers make the trip by themselves, will
result in your children being unmercifully teased by others. When my children
were attending grade school, this very situation existed with another student.
Despite being deaf -er- profoundly hearing impaired, this unfortunate
student's worse handicap was her overbearing mother. She refused to let her
daughter walk the two blocks to school.

If there are safety issues a mere two blocks from the school, you should
address the issue with the school's principal and/or school board.

You should stay home and keep the dSLR handy for photographing your neighbors.
You just never know what THEY might be up to.

<sigh>
JR
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 12:55:33 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:D 82b4i$jud$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
> Steven M. Scharf wrote:
>
> > a parent driving their kids to school (some of which live closer than we
do
> > to the school) fails to yield to kids entering the crosswalk. I have
tried
> > various approaches to dealing with this.
>
> Have you noticed a cellphone correlation?

No. Only once did someone that was so distracted by talking on the phone,
almost hit us. I confronted her at the school, and she was still talking on
the phone and just walked away. Later she drove past me while I was walking
home and apologized, claiming that it was an urgent call. Well it was so
damn urgent, pull over and talk.

The parents are singularly focused on getting their kids to school on time.
They will stop at stop signs, but they will not actually look for
pedestrians before they leave the stop sign. The police are out about once
every two weeks doing ticketing, but it is not sufficient.

I hate being over-protective, but it was a lot different when I was in
elementary school, and even in first grade we walked or rode our bikes to
school, by ourselves (and with no helmets of course).
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 12:55:34 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
news:9L2pe.257$VK4.114@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
> news:D 82b4i$jud$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
> > Steven M. Scharf wrote:
> >
> > > a parent driving their kids to school (some of which live closer than
we
> do
> > > to the school) fails to yield to kids entering the crosswalk. I have
> tried
> > > various approaches to dealing with this.
> >
> > Have you noticed a cellphone correlation?
>
> No. Only once did someone that was so distracted by talking on the phone,
> almost hit us. I confronted her at the school, and she was still talking
on
> the phone and just walked away. Later she drove past me while I was
walking
> home and apologized, claiming that it was an urgent call. Well it was so
> damn urgent, pull over and talk.
>
> The parents are singularly focused on getting their kids to school on
time.
> They will stop at stop signs,

Sounds like you live in a better community than mine. I walk by an
elementary school on my way to work and the parents rarely stop at the stop
signs.

Greg
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 1:01:40 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"James Of Tucson" <james0tucson@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1118090425.246085.149690@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> "I walk my kids to school every morning, 2 blocks, amid a sea of Honda
> Odysseys, Toyota Siennas, and assorted SUVs."
>
> Did you choose to live in a part of the world where people own such
> things, or did it decay around you?

I guess it is my own fault.

Honda should film a TV commercial for the Odyssey in my neighborhood. Even
the motorcycle cop I talked to one day noted the amazing number of Odysseys.
The local Chevrolet-Chrysler dealer closed down last year, since few people
in my city would consider a Chrysler or Chevy minivan..
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 1:01:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Steven M. Scharf wrote:

> The local Chevrolet-Chrysler dealer closed down last year, since few people
> in my city would consider a Chrysler or Chevy minivan..

Damned Honda! How dare a company make a good, simple, reliable product?

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 2:34:16 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
news:rJ0pe.202$VK4.175@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>I walk my kids to school every morning, 2 blocks, amid a sea of Honda
> Odysseys, Toyota Siennas, and assorted SUVs. There are two intersections
> with crosswalks, where at least several times per week, some driver,
> usually
> a parent driving their kids to school (some of which live closer than we
> do
> to the school)

Fu*king fat lazy b*stards.

Craig.
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 2:55:33 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> Have you noticed a cellphone correlation?

The cellphone connection is pure hype. People constantly do monumentally
stupid and dangerous things on the road, cellphone or not.

--
Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 2:55:34 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Jeremy Nixon wrote:

> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>
>>Have you noticed a cellphone correlation?
>
>
> The cellphone connection is pure hype. People constantly do monumentally
> stupid and dangerous things on the road, cellphone or not.

A U of Toronto study correlated cellphone/auto accidents to the same
rate as those of drivers with blood-alcohol levels at 0.08.

It and nother studies showed that even hands-free devices do not help
things very much.

I've had over a dozen close calls with people busy on their cell phones
over the past 7 or 8 years.

Driving cars and talking on cellphones really are a bad combo. I do it,
with an earbud, but I don't like it and I do feel like I have less
attention on the road. I'm a very self-critical driver (from my flight
instructor days). I often pull over or tell the other end to wait 10 or
30 minutes.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 2:55:34 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Jeremy Nixon" <jeremy@exit109.com> wrote in message
news:11a9l35m3ic3fdc@corp.supernews.com...
> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
> > Have you noticed a cellphone correlation?
>
> The cellphone connection is pure hype. People constantly do monumentally
> stupid and dangerous things on the road, cellphone or not.
>

Name a device that is as ubiquitous, as easy to use while driving, and as
distracting as a cell phone.

Greg
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 2:55:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <11a9r7fon706r79@corp.supernews.com>,
"G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com> wrote:

> Name a device that is as ubiquitous, as easy to use while driving, and as
> distracting as a cell phone.

A yakking mother-in-law.

Yeah, you said "device", but there it is.

:) 
JR
June 7, 2005 2:55:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

G.T. wrote:
> "Jeremy Nixon" <jeremy@exit109.com> wrote in message
> news:11a9l35m3ic3fdc@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Have you noticed a cellphone correlation?
>>
>>The cellphone connection is pure hype. People constantly do monumentally
>>stupid and dangerous things on the road, cellphone or not.
>>
>
>
> Name a device that is as ubiquitous, as easy to use while driving, and as
> distracting as a cell phone.
>
> Greg
>
>
Eyeliner, lipstick, vibrator (don't ask)... etc.
--
Slack
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 2:55:36 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Slack" <slacker7_ReMoVe_ThIs@scglobal.net> wrote in message
news:WsCdncE-ONQQnDjfRVn-hQ@giganews.com...
> G.T. wrote:
> > "Jeremy Nixon" <jeremy@exit109.com> wrote in message
> > news:11a9l35m3ic3fdc@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> >>Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Have you noticed a cellphone correlation?
> >>
> >>The cellphone connection is pure hype. People constantly do
monumentally
> >>stupid and dangerous things on the road, cellphone or not.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Name a device that is as ubiquitous, as easy to use while driving, and
as
> > distracting as a cell phone.
> >
> > Greg
> >
> >
> Eyeliner, lipstick, vibrator (don't ask)... etc.

Probably half the population doesn't apply makeup. Vibrator? No, I won't
ask.

Greg
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 4:05:21 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:D 82ldi$2g6$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
> Jeremy Nixon wrote:
>
> > Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Have you noticed a cellphone correlation?
> >
> >
> > The cellphone connection is pure hype. People constantly do
monumentally
> > stupid and dangerous things on the road, cellphone or not.
>
> A U of Toronto study correlated cellphone/auto accidents to the same
> rate as those of drivers with blood-alcohol levels at 0.08.

There is certainly a correlation between accidents and cell phone use. It is
one of the biggest causes of distracted driving. Every study (excluding ones
funded by cell phone carriers) has shown this. Furthermore, using a
hands-free device doesn't make much difference, because it isn't physically
holding the phone that is the problem, it's that you're not paying attention
to the road.

http://www.nysgtsc.state.ny.us/phon-ndx.htm
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 4:27:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> Actually I do. When I see roadway stupidity, I look for the cellphone.
> If I don't see it, then I assume they're stupid, careless or drunk.
> These days there are more people with cellphones glued to their heads.

The point is, though, maybe he was on the phone, but that had nothing to
do with the incident. You can't just say that a phone was a factor in any
accident in which a phone was in use; that's faulty logic.

> The 'kind' of close call is different. I've had guys drift out of their
> lane, people drive through lights/stops, etc. People hit their brakes
> for no reason. Common factor: hand held cell phone.

Just yesterday morning, some guy blew a stop sign and went right out in
front of me. I swerved around him at 50mph. While I did so, he gave me
the finger. No phone. He was just a moron.

> More common, less dangerous, but worrisome is people who don't keep
> track of who has right of way at a stop... people distracted on a
> cellphone are pretty bad on ROW.

Yes. People distracted by anything while driving are bad. But most of
them shouldn't be on the road in the first place, even off the phone.

> Many cities and some states have banned use of a cellphone without some
> form of handsfree. Not lightly done.

I suppose it doesn't hurt, and might help a little, but it doesn't address
the actual problem -- anyone can get a drivers' license with no need to
demonstrate any actual ability to control a car. I got mine without having
to drive over 10 mph. Bizarrely, I did have to demonstrate a "K-turn", a
maneuver that is illegal on any public road in this state.

The "road test" should test on things like highway-speed emergency lane
changes on wet pavement. That'll get something accomplished.

And selling or buying used tires should be banned.

--
Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 4:28:52 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
news:11a9nub62g4or47@corp.supernews.com...

> Sounds like you live in a better community than mine. I walk by an
> elementary school on my way to work and the parents rarely stop at the
stop
> signs.

Ask the police to do enforcement at a specific intersection. I think that
when you give them a specific intersection, rather than making a general
complaint, that they take it more seriously.
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 4:34:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
news:11a9npum6tj1qbf@corp.supernews.com...
>
> I'll have to carry my Rebel XT with me to work. I walk to work every day
> and even though the local police have sporadically focused on motorists
who
> don't stop for crosswalks no one ever stops, even when there is a cop
> sitting there. And here in California ANY intersection is considered a
> crosswalk.

Where in California are you?

Before I moved to California, I remember visiting a college roomate in
Huntington Beach. He said "watch this" and stepped of the curb to cross a
busy street. The cars immediately all stopped. I had never seen anything
like this. This was in 1980, I don't know if they still drive like that in
S. Cal, I've only been there on business a few times, and on vacation once
or twice, and I didn't try testing motorists.

You have to be careful stopping for pedestrians on roads with more than one
lane in each direction, since the vehicles in the other lanes often will not
stop, and the pedestrian can get hit, thinking that it's safe to go all the
way across.
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 4:34:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
news:%X5pe.376$VK4.34@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
> news:11a9npum6tj1qbf@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> > I'll have to carry my Rebel XT with me to work. I walk to work every
day
> > and even though the local police have sporadically focused on motorists
> who
> > don't stop for crosswalks no one ever stops, even when there is a cop
> > sitting there. And here in California ANY intersection is considered a
> > crosswalk.
>
> Where in California are you?

Burbank.

>
> Before I moved to California, I remember visiting a college roomate in
> Huntington Beach. He said "watch this" and stepped of the curb to cross a
> busy street. The cars immediately all stopped. I had never seen anything
> like this. This was in 1980, I don't know if they still drive like that in
> S. Cal, I've only been there on business a few times, and on vacation once
> or twice, and I didn't try testing motorists.

I have only a 20 minute walk and I almost get run over at least once a week.
Usually by people who are looking at street traffic rather than the sidewalk
when they pull out of a parking lot without bothering to stop.

>
> You have to be careful stopping for pedestrians on roads with more than
one
> lane in each direction, since the vehicles in the other lanes often will
not
> stop, and the pedestrian can get hit, thinking that it's safe to go all
the
> way across.
>

Definitely. It also opens you up to being rear ended which would be the
other driver's fault but who really wants to risk whiplash?

Greg
June 7, 2005 4:34:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Steven M. Scharf wrote:

> "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
> news:11a9npum6tj1qbf@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>I'll have to carry my Rebel XT with me to work. I walk to work every day
>>and even though the local police have sporadically focused on motorists
>
> who
>
>>don't stop for crosswalks no one ever stops, even when there is a cop
>>sitting there. And here in California ANY intersection is considered a
>>crosswalk.
>
>
> Where in California are you?
>
> Before I moved to California, I remember visiting a college roomate in
> Huntington Beach. He said "watch this" and stepped of the curb to cross a
> busy street. The cars immediately all stopped. I had never seen anything
> like this. This was in 1980, I don't know if they still drive like that in
> S. Cal, I've only been there on business a few times, and on vacation once
> or twice, and I didn't try testing motorists.
>
L O L I lived in HB for 5 years... if the cars didn't get you, some
drunk idiot on a beach cruiser certianly would.
--
Slack
June 7, 2005 6:29:59 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Jeremy Nixon wrote:

> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>> Have you noticed a cellphone correlation?
>
> The cellphone connection is pure hype.

Wrong, they've proven MORE accidents are caused by cell phones than drunk
drivers. I've been run off the road 3 times this year already by morons
talking on their phones.

http://www.central-insurance.com/docs/cmaaccid.htm


"According to the New England Journal of Medicine, drivers using cell phones
increase the risk of having an accident four-fold. Using a hands-free phone
did not appear to improve crash risk. If you're using a car phone while
driving -- please be careful. "
--

Stacey
June 7, 2005 6:35:00 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Jeremy Nixon wrote:

> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>> Actually I do. When I see roadway stupidity, I look for the cellphone.
>> If I don't see it, then I assume they're stupid, careless or drunk.
>> These days there are more people with cellphones glued to their heads.
>
> The point is, though, maybe he was on the phone, but that had nothing to
> do with the incident. You can't just say that a phone was a factor in any
> accident in which a phone was in use; that's faulty logic.
>


Give me a break. Over 90% of accidents are caused by the driver being
distracted, you don't think talking on a phone is a distraction? Oh of
course you're the 1 in a million "pro" driver who can talk on the phone
while eating a burger and reading a map and be in perfect control...

--

Stacey
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 7:21:09 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Jim Redelfs" <jim.redelfs@redelfs.com> wrote in message
news:jim.redelfs-9270E0.20192806062005@news.central.cox.net...
> In article <rJ0pe.202$VK4.175@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
> "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote:
>
> > I walk my kids to school every morning, 2 blocks
>
> Without reading a SINGLE reply, I'll respond...
>
> Unless the two block distance traverses a high crime rate area or the
children
> must cross an UNcontrolled, BUSY street, you should STAY HOME. You are
doing
> a disservice to your children, particularly if they are a little older.
>
> Having dear, ole Dad personally escort his little darlings a mere two
blocks,
> especially if most or all of their peers make the trip by themselves, will
> result in your children being unmercifully teased by others.

No one walks by themselves. Not many kids walk, period. It's not a high
crime rate area, but it's an area with especially poor drivers, as well as
an uncontrolled street to cross (no stop sign, no yield sign). The problem
is that most of these drivers learned to drive as adults, not teenagers, and
are inexperienced, combined with the fact that in their countries of orgin,
vehicles never yield to pedestrians. If I say any more, I'll be accused of
being a racist, even though race has nothing to do with the problem.

We have a very corrupt city council in my city, totally bought and paid for
by developers, as well as an especially inept director of public works. They
have no interest in pedestrian or bicycle safety; it's just a non-issue.
June 7, 2005 10:03:59 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

<eawckyegcy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1118102841.307851.174310@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

> http://www.reason.com/hitandrun/2005/01/are_cell_phone....
>
> Bottom line: cellphone use can cause an accident, but in the grand
> scheme of things, it's barely detectable.


Tell that to the relatives of the people who are killed each day in accidents
caused by cell phone use.

http://www.freeaccidentinfo.com/blog,16,Accidents-Linke...

Most stats I've read are even higher... (3000 or more deaths each year in U.S.)
(2492 yearly this estimate)

Steve
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 12:59:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

G.T. wrote:

> "Jeremy Nixon" <jeremy@exit109.com> wrote in message
> news:11a9l35m3ic3fdc@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Have you noticed a cellphone correlation?
>>
>>The cellphone connection is pure hype. People constantly do monumentally
>>stupid and dangerous things on the road, cellphone or not.
>>
>
>
> Name a device that is as ubiquitous, as easy to use while driving, and as
> distracting as a cell phone.

Well put.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 1:19:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Steven M. Scharf wrote:
[]
> There is certainly a correlation between accidents and cell phone
> use. It is one of the biggest causes of distracted driving. Every
> study (excluding ones funded by cell phone carriers) has shown this.
> Furthermore, using a hands-free device doesn't make much difference,
> because it isn't physically holding the phone that is the problem,
> it's that you're not paying attention to the road.

In the UK, using a mobile phone while driving is an offence that the
police can stop you for. This doesn't stop people, but they may have a
very poor defence in a court of law if prosecuted for "driving without due
care and attention"! IANAL.

David
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 1:22:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Steve wrote:

>> http://www.reason.com/hitandrun/2005/01/are_cell_phone....
>>
>> Bottom line: cellphone use can cause an accident, but in the grand
>> scheme of things, it's barely detectable.
>
>
> Tell that to the relatives of the people who are killed each day
> in accidents caused by cell phone use.

I think I just did.

>http://www.freeaccidentinfo.com/blog,16,Accidents-Linke...

Various cite 1 to 5% of accidents are supposedly related to cellphone
causes. Rubbernecking causes ~3x more accidents -- so presumably kills
3x as many people. You can add in other non-phone distractions and the
rate climbs above 50%. Are these deaths to be ignored, Steve? Is it
really your position tyhat cellphone deaths are Special? They are
Needy Victims?

Hey, did you know that adjusting the CD player causes a similar number
of accidents as cellphones? Whatdayasay, Steve, will you join me on my
campaign to outlaw radios in cars? We can even write into the law the
lack of a need for a court case: if the police find you with any radio
in your car (whether turned on or not), they can, right on the spot,
drag you from the vehicle and beat you senseless with their clubs.

> Most stats I've read are even higher...

You need a clue: these aren't "statistics" (ie, aggregations of
physically observed reality).

> (3000 or more deaths each year in U.S.)
> (2492 yearly this estimate)

http://www.livescience.com/technology/050201_cell_dange...

"The estimate of fatalities in that HCRA report ranged between 800 and
8,000."

So what is it, Steve, 400, 800, 8000, 80000 or more or less or what?
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 1:35:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

G.T. wrote:

> Probably half the population doesn't apply makeup.

You asked for an example and received one. Many more exist. Easily
the most common is food. What percentage of the population doesn't
eat?
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 1:51:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

<eawckyegcy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1118162144.755926.209120@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> G.T. wrote:
>
> > Probably half the population doesn't apply makeup.
>
> You asked for an example and received one. Many more exist. Easily
> the most common is food. What percentage of the population doesn't
> eat?
>

You don't eat for an hour at a time, no do most women put makeup on in the
car for an hour, at least those few times I eat in the car I sure don't lay
out a 5 course meal. Do you? Cell conversations last for several minutes
or even several hours. No one else has posted an example of a distraction
that lasts as long as a cell conversation. The only thing I see on the road
that does last that long is someone reading a book or using their PDA, and
those incidents are WAY more rare than cell phone usage.

You sound like an apologist for all those inconsiderate morons on cell
phones who think they're the only person on the road. The ones that can't
hold a lane for miles, the ones that go 15 mph under the speed limit because
they simply can't handle the act of listening to cell and driving at the
same time, the ones that almost run me over while I'm walking to work, etc.
No one around here is adjusting their CD or applying makeup or eating when
they try to merge into traffic, but they sure do it when on the cellphone.

Greg
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 1:51:51 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne wrote:

>> Hey, did you know that adjusting the CD player causes a similar number
>> of accidents as cellphones?
>
> People are less reactive where it comes to things like radios .. the
> road will be more important to them, it can be adjusted in times of less
> driving workload.

Read the sentence again: adjusting the CD player _CAUSES_ a similar
number of accidents as cellphones.

So your "less reactive" claim is irrelevant even if true.

> Paying attention to a cell phone conversation requires a lot more
> attention than listening to a radio report as the cellphone conversation
> participant is expected to reply intelligently. Very high distraction
> compared to listening to the radio or even another person in the car.

And yet it has been shown that the effect of other people in the car is
greater than a cellphone.

> Never mind the effort of dialing.

Gee, I bet solving partial differential equations is also pretty
distracting while driving. It is beyond time to allow police to do
random spot checks for mathematical textbooks in cars, I say.

"Sir, could you please step out of the car."
"Of course."
<a few minutes of rummaging around>
"Ah ha!"
"What?"
"Sir, can you explain the presence of Debnath's 'Nonlinear partial
differential equations for scientists and engineers' that we found on
the passenger seat?"
"I've done nothing wrong!"
"And what is this? Algorithms by Cormen, Leiserson, and Rivest? My
god! Your kind make me puke."
"Listen..."
"Sir, this is going to hurt us more than it will hurt you. Jenkins,
charge the taser."

> If you believe cell phone use is not particulalry dangerous while
> driving you are content to be ignorant.

I've already stated my position: using them can cause accidents (like
DUUUHHHHH), but there are more important things to worry about in the
larger reality.
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 2:02:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne wrote:

>> [food]
>
> While driving?

Of course. They don't call it a "drive through" for nothing. ;-)

> Myself: Only only on long trips, on the open highway, and just an apple
> or my SO handfeeds me orange slices, a sandwich half or some nuts.

Ditto. As far as I know, everyone eats while they drive when
conditions warrant.

> Trying to eat a meal at the wheel is downright stupid.

Hey, the guy wanted examples and I offered one. I have other matters
to attend to while behind the wheel, but more or less I'd say I see
more people munching, drinking, etc, behind the wheel than blabbering
into their cellphones.
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 2:20:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

<eawckyegcy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1118163729.932301.97890@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Alan Browne wrote:
>
> >> [food]
> >
> > While driving?
>
> Of course. They don't call it a "drive through" for nothing. ;-)
>
> > Myself: Only only on long trips, on the open highway, and just an apple
> > or my SO handfeeds me orange slices, a sandwich half or some nuts.
>
> Ditto. As far as I know, everyone eats while they drive when
> conditions warrant.
>
> > Trying to eat a meal at the wheel is downright stupid.
>
> Hey, the guy wanted examples and I offered one. I have other matters
> to attend to while behind the wheel, but more or less I'd say I see
> more people munching, drinking, etc, behind the wheel than blabbering
> into their cellphones.
>

That's BS. Today I've seen one person applying makeup and about 30 people
on the phone. Don't be ridiculous. Do you live in an area with poor cell
coverage?

Greg
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 2:21:43 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

G.T. wrote:

> You don't eat for an hour at a time, no do most women put makeup on in the
> car for an hour, at least those few times I eat in the car I sure don't lay
> out a 5 course meal. Do you? Cell conversations last for several minutes
> or even several hours. No one else has posted an example of a distraction
> that lasts as long as a cell conversation.

You asked for distracting devices; length of time not specified. You
aren't changing the goal-posts as examples come in, are you? "Yes,
talking to your mother-in-law is distracting, can last for hours, but
it isn't the same kind of distracting that one has when talking on the
phone to your mother-in-law while she is in Toledo. We have computer
simulations that prove this!"

> The only thing I see on the road
> that does last that long is someone reading a book or using their PDA, and
> those incidents are WAY more rare than cell phone usage.

On long -- 10 hours/day -- drives, I find myself designing software
behind the wheel in my head. Maybe the OPP is running a "Software
Engineering While Driving" Amnesty today?

> You sound like an apologist for all those inconsiderate morons on cell
> phones who think they're the only person on the road.

You sound like an intellectually dishonest powerless nutcase with a
drivers license. I fear yoyo's like you more than the drunks: at
least they are detectable, predictable and easily avoided.

> The ones that can't hold a lane for miles, the ones that go 15 mph
> under the speed limit because they simply can't handle the act of
> listening to cell and driving at the same time, the ones that almost
> run me over while I'm walking to work, etc.

We all have problems while behind the wheel. I see people eating,
talking, listening to their radios, etc, and all of this causes them to
wander in their lanes and the rest of it.

Maybe it's just me, but all of this is noticed a _LONG_ way off and I
avoid them easily. This leads to the question: just what is
distracting _you_ from noticing _them_ in time? Perhaps you can offer
your own examples?

> No one around here is adjusting their CD or applying makeup or eating when
> they try to merge into traffic, but they sure do it when on the cellphone.

And yet, strangely, adjusting the radio appears to cause the same
number of accidents as using the cellphone. Who'd a thunk? So much
for your cherished models.

(My personal guess -- backed up by some observations in Japan, and is
in complete agreement with the car-radio distraction observation -- is
that it's the ringing cellphone that does the most harm. But again,
I'm not fretting much here, as I know there are much larger threats to
worry about. If dealing with reality in a rational manner makes me an
"apologist", then so be it.)
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 4:14:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

G.T. wrote:

> Dude, do you not have traffic in southern Ontario? It stops, then goes.
> The cell users aren't hanging up when traffic starts moving again.

Your story is making even less sense than before. The only way you can
know "call users aren't hanging up when traffic starts moving again" is
that you are are -- as I suggested earlier -- looking at other drivers
while on the move.

Now it is known that rubbernecking causes 3x as many accidents as
cellphones. Just who is the risk on the roads here, anyways?

> And the CD player distraction theory is not
> wrong, you seriously think motorists fiddle with their CD player as long as
> cell morons talk on the phone?

Perhaps you can explain why car-radio distractions cause about the same
number of accidents as cellphone use?
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 4:22:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

<eawckyegcy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1118171641.697461.245790@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> G.T. wrote:
>
> > Dude, do you not have traffic in southern Ontario? It stops, then goes.
> > The cell users aren't hanging up when traffic starts moving again.
>
> Your story is making even less sense than before. The only way you can
> know "call users aren't hanging up when traffic starts moving again" is
> that you are are -- as I suggested earlier -- looking at other drivers
> while on the move.
>

Umm, because other lanes start moving first. Umm, because I can look at the
other side of the freeway where traffic is moving. Have you lost brain
cells due to too much cell phone usage?

> Now it is known that rubbernecking causes 3x as many accidents as
> cellphones. Just who is the risk on the roads here, anyways?
>
> > And the CD player distraction theory is
not
> > wrong, you seriously think motorists fiddle with their CD player as long
as
> > cell morons talk on the phone?
>
> Perhaps you can explain why car-radio distractions cause about the same
> number of accidents as cellphone use?

Citations please.

Greg
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 4:34:07 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

eawckyegcy@yahoo.com wrote:

> Hey, did you know that adjusting the CD player causes a similar number
> of accidents as cellphones?

People are less reactive where it comes to things like radios .. the
road will be more important to them, it can be adjusted in times of less
driving workload.

Paying attention to a cell phone conversation requires a lot more
attention than listening to a radio report as the cellphone conversation
participant is expected to reply intelligently. Very high distraction
compared to listening to the radio or even another person in the car.
Never mind the effort of dialing.

If you believe cell phone use is not particulalry dangerous while
driving you are content to be ignorant.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 4:39:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

G.T. wrote:

>> Perhaps you can explain why car-radio distractions cause about the same
>> number of accidents as cellphone use?
>
> Citations please.

http://www.startribune.com/stories/435/5271831.html

Quoting the article:

"Here are the top 15 driver distractions, with the percentage of
crashes where each was a factor:

1. Rubbernecking (looking at a crash, a vehicle, roadside incident,
traffic, attractive man or woman, etc.) - 16 percent.

2. Driver fatigue - 12 percent

3. Looking at scenery or landmarks - 10 percent

4. Passenger or child distractions - 9 percent

5. Adjusting radio or changing CD/tape - 7 percent

6. Cell phone - 5 percent

7. Eyes not on the road - 4.5 percent

8. Not paying attention, daydreaming - 4 percent

9. Eating or drinking - 4 percent

10. Adjusting vehicle controls - 4 percent

11. Weather conditions - 2 percent

12. Unknown - 2 percent

13. Insect, animal or object entering or striking vehicle - 2 percent

14. Document, book, map, directions or newspaper - 2 percent

15. Medical or emotional impairment - 2 percent "

I direct you attention to items (1), (5) and (6). Note that this is a
study of real accident data, not computer simulations or math-modelling
that previous studies were.

Like I said: cellphones are a risk, but there are much more serious
issues to deal with first. At least 5 of them in this case, including
my "food" example.

But hey, if you feel it is sensible to turn off your phone while you
are gawking at other drivers while on the road (see again item (1)
subitem "traffic"), I am in no position at all to disabuse you of your
tendencies...
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 4:40:35 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

eawckyegcy@yahoo.com wrote:

> G.T. wrote:
>
>
>>Probably half the population doesn't apply makeup.
>
>
> You asked for an example and received one. Many more exist. Easily
> the most common is food. What percentage of the population doesn't
> eat?

While driving?

Myself: Only only on long trips, on the open highway, and just an apple
or my SO handfeeds me orange slices, a sandwich half or some nuts.

Trying to eat a meal at the wheel is downright stupid.






--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 4:40:36 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:D 84im4$fgc$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
> eawckyegcy@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > G.T. wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Probably half the population doesn't apply makeup.
> >
> >
> > You asked for an example and received one. Many more exist. Easily
> > the most common is food. What percentage of the population doesn't
> > eat?
>
> While driving?
>
> Myself: Only only on long trips, on the open highway, and just an apple
> or my SO handfeeds me orange slices, a sandwich half or some nuts.
>
> Trying to eat a meal at the wheel is downright stupid.
>

Exactly. I just took a 1700 mile car camping trip and the few times we ate
fast food we either bought convenient driving foods or my girlfriend helped
feed me. I sure didn't want to be distracted when driving the secondary
roads of California's Lost Coast, whether there were other motorists or not.

Greg
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 4:42:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

eawckyegcy@yahoo.com blithered idiotically:

> [...] including my "food" example.

Blah. Food is 9, and 9 > 6. Dimwit.
Anonymous
a b \ Driver
June 7, 2005 4:45:51 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> writes:

> Trying to eat a meal at the wheel is downright stupid.

Ugh, got a mental picture of you eating spaghetti whilst driving.

:-)

Dragan

--
Dragan Cvetkovic,

To be or not to be is true. G. Boole No it isn't. L. E. J. Brouwer

!!! Sender/From address is bogus. Use reply-to one !!!
    • 1 / 6
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • More pages
    • Next
    • Newest
!