So trivial, yet it really ticks you off.

[3fingers]

One of the wort mistakes ever made is to ask "how are you?"

I still use that for a standard greeting, but for some folks I open with how's the grandkids or something like that. Odds are better that you're just going to hear a little bragging instead of something regarding internal organs or leakage.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Even worse is to ask someone "Whattaya think?" As any perusal of Twitter will confirm.

 

[Lean'n'mean]

Even worse is to ask someone "Whattaya think?" As any perusal of Twitter will confirm.

To use the word 'think' in conjunction with 'Twitter' is an oxymoron & in the case of Twitter, more moron than oxy.

 

[GHT]

To use the word 'think' in conjunction with 'Twitter' is an oxymoron & in the case of Twitter, more moron than oxy.

That's rather witty I must make a note of that. The only knowledge that I have of Twitter is that which I read either here, on a news website that I frequent or in a newspaper. One reason that I will never comment on those type of social media sites is because they retain everything that is posted and people regularly have a change of mind.

I am reminded of the saying that's credited to Abraham Lincoln or Mark Twain, not wishing to start a literary argument, perhaps someone from America might be able to decide who said it: "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt."

 

[GHT]

What is it with some drivers? Despite the improvements of car's headlight illumination, there are morons who seem to think that if the road is not two way, in other words a dual carriageway, or wider, they can drive on main beam and no amount of headlight flashing will get them to dip. Or is this selfish phenomenon exclusive to our Island?

 

[The Jackal]

What is it with some drivers? Despite the improvements of car's headlight illumination, there are morons who seem to think that if the road is not two way, in other words a duel carriageway, or wider, they can drive on main beam and no amount of headlight flashing will get them to dip. Or is this selfish phenomenon exclusive to our Island?

I've seen quite a few people that ride on high beams, even when behind other cars.

But also, headlights on newer cars are way brighter. I've had people flash their lights at me thinking my brights were on when they weren't simply because of how bright they are.

But to the point, yeah, I think a lot of people are either forgetful or flat don't care sometimes

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

[tonyb]

What is it with some drivers? Despite the improvements of car's headlight illumination, there are morons who seem to think that if the road is not two way, in other words a duel carriageway, or wider, they can drive on main beam and no amount of headlight flashing will get them to dip. Or is this selfish phenomenon exclusive to our Island?

No, not unique to your fair isle.

Poorly aimed headlights is a problem, too, although not as prevalent a problem as it used to be. I suspect that’s on account of the number of cars equipped with good-old sealed beams are fewer and fewer all the time.

There was a fatal collision about half a mile from here the evening before last. A mile or two in the other direction a couple of youngsters lost their lives in a tree vs. car incident a month or so ago.

Traffic enforcement? Hell yes. Give me more! Ain’t no glory in dying in a car crash, even if you did have the right of way.

 

[Zombie_61]

What is it with some drivers? Despite the improvements of car's headlight illumination, there are morons who seem to think that if the road is not two way, in other words a duel carriageway, or wider, they can drive on main beam and no amount of headlight flashing will get them to dip. Or is this selfish phenomenon exclusive to our Island?

Interesting malapropism, "duel carriageway", as I often feel as if I'm "dueling" with oncoming drivers on the narrow streets in our neighborhood. Or perhaps "jousting" would be more accurate. Driving towards each other in opposite directions with cars parked at the curbs on both sides, there is usually just enough room for all but the largest of vehicles to pass safely as long as both drivers stay on "their" side of the road, navigating the gap between the center line of the road and the parked cars. Yet the idiots who don't know how to drive insist on driving down the center of these streets even in the smallest of cars (presumably out of fear they will collide with one or more of the parked cars if they don't), forcing me to pull to the side of the road and stop in order to avoid a collision. I wouldn't mind if this was an infrequent occurrence, but I find myself playing chicken with these nitwits on an almost daily basis and they rarely acknowledge the fact that I'm enabling their stupidity.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Be lucky you don't live here in the very arteriosclerotic heart of Pothole Country. Center lines mean nothing when drivers have to swerve constantly to avoid the shell-hole pits that winter and our incompetent city council have left in the traffic lanes of all paved streets. My own street looks like Stalingrad 1942, and when the pits fill with water you never know if you're about to approach a mud puddle or a bottomless lake of death. Broken axles and shattered tie rods are as much a fact of life as breathing, while the city council throws a few buckets of coldpatch in and calls it good. Bah.

 

[tonyb]

Be lucky you don't live here in the very arteriosclerotic heart of Pothole Country. Center lines mean nothing when drivers have to swerve constantly to avoid the shell-hole pits that winter and our incompetent city council have left in the traffic lanes of all paved streets. My own street looks like Stalingrad 1942, and when the pits fill with water you never know if you're about to approach a mud puddle or a bottomless lake of death. Broken axles and shattered tie rods are as much a fact of life as breathing, while the city council throws a few buckets of coldpatch in and calls it good. Bah.

Used to be that the streets in the southeast section of Seattle, the historically (but no longer) low-rent district, were patched with the asphalt left over from paving projects in other parts of town.

You know how the mogul runs at ski resorts look? You know, all those lumps and bumps? Imagine one in dark shades of gray and you have a sense of many a street in Rainier Valley circa 1974.

 

[GHT]

Interesting malapropism, "duel carriageway", as I often feel as if I'm "dueling" with oncoming drivers on the narrow streets in our neighborhood. Or perhaps "jousting" would be more accurate.

Do you know that I read and re-read every post I make, then I proof read it again once it's posted, but my smart-ass spellchecker knows better than me. It should of course, be dual, which I have just edited it to. I'm convinced that my spellchecker is hooked on something illegal, it's always underlining correctly spelt words.

 

[GHT]

Yet the idiots who don't know how to drive insist on driving down the center of these streets even in the smallest of cars (presumably out of fear they will collide with one or more of the parked cars if they don't), forcing me to pull to the side of the road and stop in order to avoid a collision.

I saw this scrawled in the road dirt on the back of a car:
"I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing."
We used to use something similar years ago. You will never find a circumcised driver behaving erratically, that's because they are not a complete dick.

 

[Zombie_61]

Do you know that I read and re-read every post I make, then I proof read it again once it's posted, but my smart-ass spellchecker knows better than me. It should of course, be dual, which I have just edited it to. I'm convinced that my spellchecker is hooked on something illegal, it's always underlining correctly spelt words.

Oh, "duel" was spelled correctly.

 

[Fading Fast]

A friend of mine told me he recently got fined for not wearing his seatbelt (he was none too pleased). I'm a full supporter of having - and of strong enforcement of - all the rules, regs, laws, fines, etc. to prevent reckless driving, drunk driving, protecting children in and from cars, learning the rules of the road, maintaining your car in safe order, etc., as those things can hurt others, but if you want to ride around without a seatbelt, it should be your choice. My choice is to always wear one.

 

[GHT]

but if you want to ride around without a seatbelt, it should be your choice. My choice is to always wear one.

The argument against the freedom of choice to wear, or not wear, a seatbelt, takes on a different angle in the UK. If, as a result of not wearing a seatbelt, a driver is admitted to hospital with serious injuries, the medical help to recovery that driver will receive, is free at the point of delivery. It's not free of course, we all pay for it through taxation. So the argument is that time, money and resources might have been better spent elsewhere. A similar argument goes for smoking and substance & alcohol abuse.
Drivers can argue, as can smokers, that they pay their taxes like everyone else, that's true and they get free medical treatment like everyone else. But it still doesn't negate the argument that resources are spent when they really didn't need to be.

 

[Bamaboots]

but if you want to ride around without a seatbelt, it should be your choice.

My perspective on this may be somewhat different than others. I've been wearing seat belt's since long before it was mandatory. Having been in a position to immediately see the aftermath of the differences in what not wearing them and what wearing them can be, I'm glad it's not so much a choice anymore.

 

[Fading Fast]

The argument against the freedom of choice to wear, or not wear, a seatbelt, takes on a different angle in the UK. If, as a result of not wearing a seatbelt, a driver is admitted to hospital with serious injuries, the medical help to recovery that driver will receive, is free at the point of delivery. It's not free of course, we all pay for it through taxation. So the argument is that time, money and resources might have been better spent elsewhere. A similar argument goes for smoking and substance & alcohol abuse.
Drivers can argue, as can smokers, that they pay their taxes like everyone else, that's true and they get free medical treatment like everyone else. But it still doesn't negate the argument that resources are spent when they really didn't need to be.

That's one of the reason libertarians like me are against socialized medicine as it leads to arguments such as the one you made. That said, I want to point out that my post didn't get into that as, if we take this any further, we'll be into a political discussion.

My perspective on this may be somewhat different than others. I've been wearing seat belt's since long before it was mandatory. Having been in a position to immediately see the aftermath of the differences in what not wearing them and what wearing them can be, I'm glad it's not so much a choice anymore.

As noted, I wear a seatbelt myself and I also hate smoking and have never done it (I saw what it did to my father and grandmother), but still believe adults should be free to choose. I'm happy to stop there - and I have no doubt you and most of those who disagree with me are coming from a good place - because, otherwise, it's off to the races on a not-Fedora-Lounge-appropriate political discussion.

 

[tonyb]

People, especially younger people, tend toward believing bad things happen only to other people. I know this because I am a people, who used to smoke and drink to great excess and drive without wearing a seatbelt and even occasionally ride a motorcycle sans helmet in those times and places that the law didn’t require it.

I may be a candidate for an organ transplant at some point. I do what I can (within reason) to maintain my eligibility for such a procedure, which is to say I don’t smoke or drink or abuse other substances. (A friend, a guy I met when we were 15 or so, died a couple years back. He contracted Hep C from a blood transfusion following a car wreck caused by his own drunkenness about 40 years ago. Maybe 10 years after that he received a liver transplant. He took good care of himself [physically, anyway] for several years until his wife dumped him. Long story short(ish): he went off his medications and took up the bottle again, which trashed his loaner liver. When it failed, well, he died. They don’t give a guy another organ when he’s demonstrated an unwillingness to take care of the first one they put in him.)

Here in this freedumb-loving state motorcyclists age 18 and above can legally ride without helmets. For my own entirely selfish reasons, I hope that remains the case.

 

[Bamaboots]

I understand the freedom of choice stance and appreciate this. My preferences are practical but selfish as well. Someone has to clean up the mess.

 

[GHT]

About thirty years ago I remember reading in our press of the city of San Luis Obispo, California, that became the first city in the world to restrict indoor smoking in bars as well as restaurants. At the time I thought it would be curtains for the entertainments business. I also thought it a restriction on personal liberty, even though I'm a non smoker.

I can't speak for other countries but what has happened in ours is that some businesses did fall by the wayside but most have embraced the smoking ban and eating out in a smoke free environment has become such a pleasure that dining out has risen since the smoking ban.

Fading Fast's point about freedom of choice is an argument with which I concur, but I have grown up in a world that has free medicine for all, and I know no difference. My right leg was shattered by a hit and run driver when I was 14, my recovery took almost three years, heaven knows how my family would have managed had they been saddled with the cost of my treatment. So, treading carefully not to raise political hackles, freedom is important, but sometimes you have to make a trade off. Each to their own I guess.

I understand the freedom of choice stance and appreciate this. My preferences are practical but selfish as well. Someone has to clean up the mess.

Quite so, my wife spent her working life in the ambulance service as a paramedic, she saw the carnage of which you speak, first hand. Day after day after day.