On 5/31/2010 4:36 AM, Boris Liberman wrote:
On 5/30/2010 8:44 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
Boris
There might be some merit to that. Some studies, (I wish I had a link
but a Google search will probably turn up a bunch pro and con), have
show that in many cases intersections are safer with fewer lights,
and signs. Drivers are more cautious entering, they don't have a
false sense of security.
Well, yes, I was surprised by some "unmanaged" crossings around Stanford
(I think it was Stanford that I visited some years ago). You will also
be surprised that very often if a busy crossing lights break in my area,
it is usually major time loss for commuters.
However I'll answer on point. Your example is a straw man. The
"benefit" from street lights and other traffic control improvements
accrue to all drivers and most pedestrians, pretty much all of
society, pretty much directly.
Well, I've read some arguments or opinions against that in other
messages in this thread, but /I/ agree with you - the benefit is there.
The only thing everyone gains from this is a good feeling, that we've
/done/ /something/. Which is still likely to a.) not solve the
problem, I believe in the idiocy of dedicated idiots, and b.) cause
more had wringing when it doesn't work. I know everyone can be and
Idiot about something sometimes. Hell I'm an idiot more than most,
(someday I'll tell the story of how I ran over my own dog. He
survived...), but I don't expect society to save me from my idiocy,
because it can't!
Well, Peter, you just called an idiot my wife who admitted to me
yesterday (we talked about this thread a bit) that since she is sitting
next to me and our younger is sitting alone on the back sit, she caught
herself once or twice that she was forgetting about Anat. I am thinking
that you should at least reconsider and at most apologize.
Peter, consider very simple and likely scenario. An alone mother of
two kids must get one kid to the hospital. And she cannot leave the
other child at home. She takes that child with them and under pressure
and stress forgets that poor child in the car. I see no "dedicated
idiocy" here. I see a tragic possibility for which I would gladly pay
$10 of my money every year to have it avoided across my country.
Admittedly, it'll give me a /good feeling/ that you pointed out, but
it as well may save some _innocent_ lives...
... But we have to recognize that life is dangerous. We cannot
guarantee perfect safety, to all people at all times. We can't afford
it either financially or more importantly for the sake of the
individual's spirit. To even attempt to do so is a fools errand.
Somebody's got to say stop somewhere.
That's right. But you can give it a proper benefit of a doubt, spend
your time considering and not dismiss any such offer outright just
because.
Boris
I won't appoligize, after all I also called myself an idiot. There are
other options, if your car has keyless entry you may already have one
solution. Some keyless systems won't let you lock the car if an
electronic key is in the car. If yours works that way attach the fob to
the baby's car seat. The car won't let you forget it. I'm sure that
there are other solutions if you're that worried. But your wife didn't
forget the child, and I doubt she would, almost forgetting is something
else. But that brings up an important question; Why do you expect or
want the State to tell you to do something that you already know you
should do, why do you want the State to treat you as an incompetent?
--
{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Courier
New;}}
\viewkind4\uc1\pard\f0\fs20 I've just upgraded to Thunderbird 3.0 and the
interface subtly weird.\par
}
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
