Christian McArdle
Logically, because everything has an effect on someone (whether for good or ill, or both), are you saying that no-one should be allowed to do anything?
I want it now 4WD 271I know your point of view. I think you're reading more into mine than I write. The impacts are different between the two against a regular car. It is clear that a SUV...
Of course you're not. You didn't mean it as literally as that. Obviously, people must be allowed to do some things that "have an impact on others" whether or not that "impact" is even acceptable to those "others" (putting a bit of extra human sewage into the foul drain is as good an example as any).
But where to draw the line?
I want it now 4WD 269JNugent If "PP" means the chap who started the thread, then it was I. The couple, and people like them, don't suffer from personality disorder, they're just entirely taken with the idea...
It's subjective.
Who gets, then, to make the decisions?
The other person?
Or you?
Or someone else?
And on what basis is the decision to be made?
Allegedly.
Even those doing the alleging don't argue that it is not infinitesimally trivial compared to (say) a good Krakatoa or Mt Helena style volcanic eruption or two.
sorry about the double-negative - the sentence doesn't read as well when it is eliminated - IMO
So let's keep it all in perspective, eh? Failure to do that very reasonable thing can lead to suspicion that people who write hilarious stuff like "Using a hand held mobile phone whilst driving a 3 tonne wankmobile affects others through the medium of liquidateing law abiding road users" are not expecting to be taken seriously, whereas I'm fairly sure that you DO wish to be taken seriously - and that requires that you think and write in a logical, thoughtful and serious manner, doesn't it?
There are too many illogical things in that sentence to deal with them all in one post. I'm sure that on reflection, you can see what they are. Most of them, anyway.
