Acer;
With LOGIC like this, I do hope you're not studying engineering. Or
statistical analysis for that matter.
George
>
>It's all in the false sense of safety the behemoth vehicles have (wrongly
>so; they MAY fare better in a crash IF they are built to car safety
>standards, which they are not as they are truck based and thus exempt),
>but sedans/wagons etc are MORE nimble, and thus are actively able to AVOID
>an accident instead of faring better IN one (IF the SUV had the same safe
>build of sedans in terms of body type (unit, ladder, etc).
So, you think poeple who drive SUVs do not go out of their way to avoid
accidents? Nay, they actually like to drive like it's a demolition derby out
there because they'll surely be spared any injury.
>
>I speak for California, and any other urban area: most attracted to SUVS
>are the types that least need them,
What are your sources for this implausible statement?
> and can least handle them (on top
>of yapping on the cellfone while driving,
Of course, no one in a nimble Beemer ever uses a cell phone. And even is
they did, they'd be able to easily avoid any impending doom by simply
zipping out of the way. (Acer-logic 101)
>or reading, all of which I have
>seen people do DAILY).
And they're ALL in SUVs.
>SUVs by themselves are not bad, it's the attraction
>they have for the incompetant drivers that is my peeve. I can go on, but I
>won't for now.
Now you pissed me off. You just called my wife and I incompetent drivers?
Check this, bigot, in 13 years of driving an SUV only twice have our SUVs
been hit. Once it was parked, the other time stopped at a red light.
Oh and BTW, I hear that it's true that Southern California colleges attract
only illogical morons and abusive wife killers. Is that true?
George
>
>
>/Acer "steppenwolf" Victoria
>--
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|