Yes, and you were wrong that time too.
So here we go with the lack of logic skills.
NIP arrived. 970You have had the dictionary definitions of dangerous from three dictionaries and roads are covered nicely by...
It requires a person to fire it. It is the action of the person that is dangerous. The object is not.
NIP arrived. 971Following up to Mark Foster but you are going too far the other way. I agree. BTW I also rather wonder how often "lost control" is accurate either, or...
The road design can be bad. I have never said any differently.
Factors! NOT dangerous in themselves.
I haven't. It's straightforward logic.
No it isn't. It is a demonstration that the object itself is not dangerous. You perceive it to be dangerous because of the damage it can cause if misused. It doesn't matter what the object is, the fact remains that the object itself cannot do anything unless used and is therefore NOT dangerous.
NIP arrived. 972Not really. Depending on the sightlines on the road, you have a greater or lesser chance of being able to see (and avoid...
So tell me again. How is the "thing" ... hang on we've been here twice and both times you failed to demonstrate how the object can do anything whatsoever without interaction.
Yes. BIG need to support it. If you're going to use something to suuport your position you'd better make sure it stands up.
My position is that there is no such thing as a dangerous road, only those that require more care, attention, skill and effort. The road itself is an inanimate object and has no power whatsoever to DO anything. Yes, the design of the road is a factor in how safely it can be driven and by whom. That does NOT mean the road is dangerous. To say so is a thinly disguised attempt to abdicate responsibility.
-- Mark Foster, Brighton, Suslove, UK PGP Fingerprint: 3342 C02C 7BE8 3FE4 AAC5 8BB2 03B7 9263 DDF2 04C1 -------------------------------------------------- "There are no such useless words as...'I didn't have a chance.'" Driving, HMSO
