Experimentals To Be Banned To Rural Airports?

"John" wrote in message news:0rVtk.9$Af3.5@trnddc06...

"Mike" wrote in message
news:s9Stk.1198$Ro1.612@trnddc04...
"Ramsey" @##@.^net wrote in message
news

"Mike" wrote in message
news:tNRtk.1134$w51.346@trnddc01...
"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
In article Y4Htk.1161$Ro1.744@trnddc04, "Mike"
wrote:

Nobody wants to give up their "right" to
drive with a cell phone, ignore speed limits, run stop lights, etc.
even
though such activity puts other people at risk.

"drive with a cell phone" .... ohmygawd. Hey, what about drive with
one of those GPS thingies, or changing CDs or scanning thru XM radio
or....?
Maybe we should require a sterile car so that nothing, absolutely
nothing
can distract the driver.

(yep - this crusade about talking on a cellphone is a hot button for
me).

Crusade all you want. Argue from silly extremes all you want. Talking
on the phone while driving increases risk of having a serious accident
by 4-5 times. But you prove my point beautifully. People don't really
give a rat's arse about being safer if it inconvieniences them, even if
the inconvienience is slight.

Got any data to support that?

Yes.

Your google broke?

Your bluffs been called, show your cards or fold your hand.

I don't play that game. I feel no obligation to be your personal research
service on a subject that has been widely reported. But if you explain how
you're too inept to use google, I'll be glad to talk about it. Cell phones
+ driving + risks yields 264,000 results including numerous studies
published in peer reviewed publications on the subject.


PS. We have laws about proper vehicle operation already, we don't need
new laws that call out specific activiries. Enforce what we have already

That's your opinion, unsupported by facts. As I said, you've already proven
my point beautifully. All you want to do now is go off topic.