On Fri, 01 Jan 2010 18:25:29 -0600, Larry Blanchard
wrote:

On Fri, 01 Jan 2010 13:33:08 -0500, J. Clarke wrote:

Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Fri, 01 Jan 2010 01:53:54 -0500, dhall987 wrote:

After driving for over 55 years, I've been involved in three minor
and one major accidents, all of which were the other driver's fault.
And that includes time spent on LA freeways and Chicago surface
streets, as well as five years as a full time RVer.

Sorry. I knew a lady once that hadn't left her house for 15 years
because it is "just too dangerous" out here. She is probably a bit
safer in her house than out in public, but self-imposed prison just
doesn't seem worth it....

So driving attentively is a "self-imposed prison" and equates to a
phobia? Your reasoning is defective. Or are you just trolling?

No, not leaving your house in 15 years is a self-imposed prison.

I agree. But either "dhall987" was equating that behavior to my post on
driving, or he was off on a tangent that had no point.

Clearly I was equating having to suck a hard candy to escape thirst
while driving or actually not being able to listen to the radio and
drive at the same time and defining that as a requirement for "driving
attentively" as being similar to deciding to force oneself to stay in
their home for 15 years in order to avoid normal dangers that do, in
fact, exist outside the home. I do not feel that I was on any tangent
or that I had no point. It seems to be the type of extremism that
keeps valid safety laws (like no texting while driving) from being
passed. Clearly I personally do not find anything wrong or even
slightly out of place with having a drink (non-alcaholic of course)
while I drive. I have a decent OEM stereo in my truck and actually
play it while I drive. I have even been known to eat a potato chip or
even a sandwich while driving down interstate. So yes, I do think that
taking an extreme position on absolutely no "distractions" (as you
have defined them) while drviing to be a mild to middling phobia.