They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 10:40:28 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

Lies, damn lies, and statistics. Most people (there are thickos like
you who can't) multitask well, as I just said, it's required to drive,
driving in itself requires several things to be done at once. Adding
one (the phone) to that makes **** all difference.

You're special,

No, I'm normal. People can multitask easily, that's a fact. If you
cannot, you're retarded and unlikely to have passed your driving test,
you couldn't control speed and direction and gears and watch for hazards
and use indicators and operate the wipers etc etc.

so you can multitask perfectly. And even be unaffected
by adding another task to the mix, this one requiring removing a hand
from driving duties and occasional looking away from driving :-D

So does changing gear.

Do you also believe you don't need to wear a seatbelt?

I never wear a seatbelt unless I'm driving fast in deep snow. The
chances of a bump big enough to need one are remote.

A helmet while biking?

Cycling or motorbiking?

A safety line while up high?

Depends how well I can hold onto things. Am I using lots of tools which
need a hand or two?

Heh. Of course not.

Invalid assumption.

It's only other
people who do not perform perfectly, have accidents, and have to have
society deal with the consequences. Stupid other people! Why can't they
be more like you?

Meanwhile back in reality... :-)

You're clearly a **** driver and are making yourself feel better by
claiming many others are the same. The fact remains the vast majority
of people never have anything more than a minor bump in their entire
life of driving.

Because most sensible people with common sense don't do stupid things
like texting at the wheel. Most accident occurs in a split second. It's
a case of learn and live or learn and die(or maimed) Visit an emergency
ward in your local hospital and look at the injured drivers coming in
due to accident. Most cause is human error or negligence(like not
wearing seat belt).

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 1/22/2016 9:54 AM, nospam wrote:




not that it matters a whole lot, since a screaming baby can be heard in
the entire cabin.


Never bothered me on a plane. Babies can't help it. Only time is like
at a restaurant where the parent can take the kid and do what has to be
done to stop them but ignorantly chooses not to. .

Some idiots are self centered without any regard to others.

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

Your Name wrote:
In article , Frank Slootweg
wrote:
Your Name wrote:
[...]
Ah, the ridiculous "flappy paddle" system that's becoming a fad in the
car industry these days. :-( Usually that means it's not a real manual
/ "stick shift" car, but a silly automatic pretending to be a manual /
"stick shift".

Well, in the Formula 1 (and most of the rest of the car racing) world
they don't consider them "silly" at all.

Remember that most of what we consider quite normal or even standard
now, was a "fad" once or/and came from other industries (like my car
racing example).

That doesn't make it a right nor sensible thing to change. The road
isn't the same as a racing circuit (no matter what boy racer hoons like
to think).

It's not a change, at least not yet for a long time. It's just another
option.

They tend to be a pain in the backside when wanting to go to reverse
(especially in something like a multi-point turn where you have to go
backwards and forwards a number of times because you have to keep going
through neutral. That is something racing drivers don't usually have to
worry about doing!

Same thing. Just two clicks with the paddles, instead of two movements
with the gear-stick. And the gear-stick also goes through neutral.

And to get somewhat back to the topic of the thread, these "flappy
paddle" can make driving *safer*, because your hands can remain on the
steering wheel, instead of fiddling with the gear-stick (or worse :-))!

Technically it makes this less safe ... at least in the short term as
the driver gets used to the new system and trying to remember which
paddle goes up and which goes down.

Sure it needs getting used to, but much less than for example a switch
between manual and automatic, because that also involves the pedals.

I wouldn't be surprised if different manufacturers / countries also
have their own ideas about the "correct" way to do that as well.

Don't know, but probably not. For example it's also the same for
gear-sticks in left-/righhand drive countries. What's often different is
the position of reverse. And of course window-wipers versus indicators.

But anyway, my response was light-hearted and a way to try to get away
from the texting-while-driving-is-perfectly-safe loons!

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:49:41 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 23:56:55 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 23:43:27 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

People DO multitask and they're very good at it. If you're not, maybe
you should consider not driving, which already involves doing about 5 things at once.

I didn't say people *can't* multitask - I said they *suck* at it, which has
been scientifically proven. The fact is people are not very good at
multitasking, and studies also show the ones who think they are the best at
it are actually among the worst. The fact remains a passenger who is
holding a conversation with a driver can respond to cues while a person
miles away over the phone simply cannot.

thickos like you

Personal insults. Not surprised. You lose.

No, an observation that you can't do a simple task like multitasking.

You haven't observed any such thing, liar. You lose.

You're the one that said it was true, did you lie?

--
Religion has actually convinced people that there's an invisible man -- living in the sky -- who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do.. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever 'til the end of time! ..But He loves you. -- George Carlin

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:49:41 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 23:56:55 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 23:43:27 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

People DO multitask and they're very good at it. If you're not, maybe
you should consider not driving, which already involves doing about 5 things at once.

I didn't say people *can't* multitask - I said they *suck* at it, which has
been scientifically proven. The fact is people are not very good at
multitasking, and studies also show the ones who think they are the best at
it are actually among the worst. The fact remains a passenger who is
holding a conversation with a driver can respond to cues while a person
miles away over the phone simply cannot.

thickos like you

Personal insults. Not surprised. You lose.

No, an observation that you can't do a simple task like multitasking.

You haven't observed any such thing, liar. You lose.

The fact that you think of this conversation as some sort of competition makes you pathetic.

--
Religion has actually convinced people that there's an invisible man -- living in the sky -- who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do.. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever 'til the end of time! ..But He loves you. -- George Carlin

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

burfordTjustice wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 10:20:36 -0800
Savageduck wrote:

On 2016-01-22 17:46:26 +0000, burfordTjustice
said:

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 09:45:59 -0800
Savageduck wrote:
On Jan 22, 2016, Muggles wrote
(in
):
On 1/21/2016 10:42 PM, nospam wrote:
In article
,
Muggles wrote:

Funny thing happened today as I was at a light waiting for
light to change. I was in the left turn lane facing north,
and the highway traffic coming off the highway heading
across my path showed a police car going past me and the
cop driving was talking on his cell phone.

I just shook my head as I watched him drive past me.

Police are allowed to break most traffic laws *IF* it's
appropriate for doing their job (the obvious example being
speeding and running red traffic lights when on an emergency
call out). Unfortunately there are many cases of police being
just as moronically stupid as the rest of the human race and
using their cellphone for non-official business while
driving, illegally parking so they can grab a coffee, etc.

At least he wasn't texting and driving.

even better, cops have a laptop sitting right next to them, where
they type and drive all the time, checking license plates or
pulling up information relevant to a call.

I hadn't thought of that! I wonder if that should be illegal while
driving, too.

There is always this other distraction option to try out.
http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2016/0...e-man-for-dwr-
driving-while-reading/


Broken link! WTF??

Consider your broken Usenet client.
...but just for you;
http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2016/01/21/eagan-police-fine-man-for-dwr-driving-while-reading/


See, now why could you not do that correctly first time?

It *was* correct the first time. That neither your newsreader nor your
'brain' could handle it, is nobodies problem but yours.

lazy?

Nope. It's just your cluelessness, which is apparently 'progressing'
to stupidity.

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:53:09 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Just Me wrote:
Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 23:56:55 -0000, Jolly Roger
wrote:
Mr Macaw wrote:

thickos like you

Personal insults. Not surprised. You lose.

No, an observation that you can't do a simple task like multitasking.

Mr Macaw is the well known unemployable ****** and troll Peter Hucker. He
has many socks.

Good to know. Thanks.

Many socks indeed, as does the person you just replied to.

--
I just found out one of my friends has died.
He overdosed on indigestion liquid.
I can't believe Gav is gone!

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 18:28:15 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 10:40:28 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:

Do you also believe you don't need to wear a seatbelt?

I never wear a seatbelt unless I'm driving fast in deep snow. The
chances of a bump big enough to need one are remote.

Color me shocked...

Put more effort into your reply.

You're clearly a **** driver

Sure he is - just because you say so...

I can't remember what I said, as you've snipped it again.

--
I just found out one of my friends has died.
He overdosed on indigestion liquid.
I can't believe Gav is gone!

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
[...]
Never bothered me on a plane. Babies can't help it.

Never bothered us either, while we have made many (several dozen) of
very long flights (Europe to Australia, some 14+9 hours in each
direction).

What however bothers me a lot are crybabies and there are a lot of
those, especially in this thread!

[...]

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 19:14:45 -0000, Tony Hwang wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 10:40:28 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

Lies, damn lies, and statistics. Most people (there are thickos like
you who can't) multitask well, as I just said, it's required to drive,
driving in itself requires several things to be done at once. Adding
one (the phone) to that makes **** all difference.

You're special,

No, I'm normal. People can multitask easily, that's a fact. If you
cannot, you're retarded and unlikely to have passed your driving test,
you couldn't control speed and direction and gears and watch for hazards
and use indicators and operate the wipers etc etc.

so you can multitask perfectly. And even be unaffected
by adding another task to the mix, this one requiring removing a hand
from driving duties and occasional looking away from driving :-D

So does changing gear.

Do you also believe you don't need to wear a seatbelt?

I never wear a seatbelt unless I'm driving fast in deep snow. The
chances of a bump big enough to need one are remote.

A helmet while biking?

Cycling or motorbiking?

A safety line while up high?

Depends how well I can hold onto things. Am I using lots of tools which
need a hand or two?

Heh. Of course not.

Invalid assumption.

It's only other
people who do not perform perfectly, have accidents, and have to have
society deal with the consequences. Stupid other people! Why can't they
be more like you?

Meanwhile back in reality... :-)

You're clearly a **** driver and are making yourself feel better by
claiming many others are the same. The fact remains the vast majority
of people never have anything more than a minor bump in their entire
life of driving.

Because most sensible people with common sense don't do stupid things
like texting at the wheel.

It's only stupid if you can only manage 4 things at once and not 5. Driving is NOT one thing.

Most accident occurs in a split second. It's
a case of learn and live or learn and die(or maimed) Visit an emergency
ward in your local hospital and look at the injured drivers coming in
due to accident. Most cause is human error or negligence(like not
wearing seat belt).

Why should I protect myself against something that will probably never happen?

--
My memory sucks, so I changed my computer password to incorrect. That way if I forget it, it tells me "your password is incorrect".

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

In article , burfordTjustice
wrote:


There is always this other distraction option to try out.
http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2016/0...e-man-for-dwr-
driving-while-reading/


Broken link! WTF??

Consider your broken Usenet client.
...but just for you;
http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2016/01/21/eagan-police-fine-man-for-dwr-driving-while-reading/

See, now why could you not do that correctly first time?
lazy?

he did.

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

In article , burfordTjustice
wrote:


There is always this other distraction option to try out.
http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2016/0...e-man-for-dwr-
driving-while-reading/


Broken link! WTF??

the link works just fine.

you need a better newsreader, one which is rfc compliant.

Oh dear..usenet police....noted and ignored.

nope.

the problem is at *your* end.

the link is valid and rfc compliant, even when quoted above.

if it doesn't work in your newsreader, then your newsreader is broken.
it's that simple. you can either fix the problem or keep on bitching.

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make adifference
 

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 15:11:30 -0500
nospam wrote:

In article , burfordTjustice
wrote:


There is always this other distraction option to try out.
http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2016/0...e-man-for-dwr-
driving-while-reading/


Broken link! WTF??

the link works just fine.

you need a better newsreader, one which is rfc compliant.

Oh dear..usenet police....noted and ignored.

nope.

the problem is at *your* end.

the link is valid and rfc compliant, even when quoted above.

if it doesn't work in your newsreader, then your newsreader is broken.
it's that simple. you can either fix the problem or keep on bitching.

I told you:
Oh dear..usenet police....noted and ignored.

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make adifference
 

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 15:11:29 -0500
nospam wrote:

In article , burfordTjustice
wrote:


There is always this other distraction option to try out.
http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2016/0...e-man-for-dwr-
driving-while-reading/


Broken link! WTF??

Consider your broken Usenet client.
...but just for you;
http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2016/01/21/eagan-police-fine-man-for-dwr-driving-while-reading/

See, now why could you not do that correctly first time?
lazy?

he did.

Oh dear..usenet police....noted and ignored.

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:49:41 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 23:56:55 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 23:43:27 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

People DO multitask and they're very good at it. If you're not, maybe
you should consider not driving, which already involves doing about 5 things at once.

I didn't say people *can't* multitask - I said they *suck* at it, which has
been scientifically proven. The fact is people are not very good at
multitasking, and studies also show the ones who think they are the best at
it are actually among the worst. The fact remains a passenger who is
holding a conversation with a driver can respond to cues while a person
miles away over the phone simply cannot.

thickos like you

Personal insults. Not surprised. You lose.

No, an observation that you can't do a simple task like multitasking.

You haven't observed any such thing, liar. You lose.

You're the one that said it was true, did you lie?

You haven't observed my driving. You lose.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:

I can't remember what I said

....the least of your problems.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:46:56 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:49:41 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 23:56:55 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 23:43:27 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

People DO multitask and they're very good at it. If you're not, maybe
you should consider not driving, which already involves doing about 5 things at once.

I didn't say people *can't* multitask - I said they *suck* at it, which has
been scientifically proven. The fact is people are not very good at
multitasking, and studies also show the ones who think they are the best at
it are actually among the worst. The fact remains a passenger who is
holding a conversation with a driver can respond to cues while a person
miles away over the phone simply cannot.

thickos like you

Personal insults. Not surprised. You lose.

No, an observation that you can't do a simple task like multitasking.

You haven't observed any such thing, liar. You lose.

You're the one that said it was true, did you lie?

You haven't observed my driving. You lose.

So you're admitting your claim was false?

--
For this race I'm going to be using "beati dogu". Japanese for the ancient art of driving a sports car round a track faster than a greyhound. -- Richard Hammond

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:49:28 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:

I can't remember what I said

...the least of your problems.

At least I know how to operate a newsreader, is there any wonder you can't drive?

--
A blue whale's heart is roughly the size of a VW Beetle, and its aorta is large enough for a human to crawl through.

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:46:56 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:49:41 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 23:56:55 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

thickos like you

Personal insults. Not surprised. You lose.

No, an observation that you can't do a simple task like multitasking.

You haven't observed any such thing, liar. You lose.

You're the one that said it was true, did you lie?

You haven't observed my driving. You lose.

So you're admitting your claim was false?

Name the claim I made that was false.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:49:28 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:

I can't remember what I said

...the least of your problems.

At least I know how to operate a newsreader, is there any wonder you can't drive?

Another lie. Lame.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:55:18 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:46:56 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:49:41 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 23:56:55 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

thickos like you

Personal insults. Not surprised. You lose.

No, an observation that you can't do a simple task like multitasking.

You haven't observed any such thing, liar. You lose.

You're the one that said it was true, did you lie?

You haven't observed my driving. You lose.

So you're admitting your claim was false?

Name the claim I made that was false.

You said it was scientifically proven that people cannot multitask.

--
Times are tough.
Just the other day, I saw a beggar who was so broke that he was standing on the corner shouting at the cars that went by.
He was shouting, "WILL WORK FOR CARDBOARD AND A MAGIC MARKER!"

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:55:42 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:49:28 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:

I can't remember what I said

...the least of your problems.

At least I know how to operate a newsreader, is there any wonder you can't drive?

Another lie. Lame.

Snipping is trolling.

--
Times are tough.
Just the other day, I saw a beggar who was so broke that he was standing on the corner shouting at the cars that went by.
He was shouting, "WILL WORK FOR CARDBOARD AND A MAGIC MARKER!"

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On 1/22/2016 12:05 PM, Muggles wrote:

even better, cops have a laptop sitting right next to them, where they
type and drive all the time, checking license plates or pulling up
information relevant to a call.


I hadn't thought of that! I wonder if that should be illegal while
driving, too.


Distracted Driving takes many forms and that would be one. In MA they
are trying to pass a law making anything using hands is illegal.
Specific they mention programming the GPS. Yes, that can be
distracting. Tried it and found it easier and safer to pull over.

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:55:18 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:46:56 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:49:41 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 23:56:55 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

thickos like you

Personal insults. Not surprised. You lose.

No, an observation that you can't do a simple task like multitasking.

You haven't observed any such thing, liar. You lose.

You're the one that said it was true, did you lie?

You haven't observed my driving. You lose.

So you're admitting your claim was false?

Name the claim I made that was false.

You said it was scientifically proven that people cannot multitask.

Nope. You have a reading comprehension problem. Read what I actually
said again and get back with me. Or don't - I care not. Your trolls are
boring.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:55:42 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:49:28 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:

I can't remember what I said

...the least of your problems.

At least I know how to operate a newsreader, is there any wonder you can't drive?

Another lie. Lame.

Snipping is trolling.

Awww let's break out the violins for the troll who gets trolled.
Boo-hoo, poor you! Get over yourself, trollboi.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:21:52 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:55:18 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:46:56 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:49:41 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 23:56:55 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

thickos like you

Personal insults. Not surprised. You lose.

No, an observation that you can't do a simple task like multitasking.

You haven't observed any such thing, liar. You lose.

You're the one that said it was true, did you lie?

You haven't observed my driving. You lose.

So you're admitting your claim was false?

Name the claim I made that was false.

You said it was scientifically proven that people cannot multitask.

Nope. You have a reading comprehension problem. Read what I actually
said again and get back with me. Or don't - I care not. Your trolls are
boring.

You've snipped it, paste it back in.

--
A patient complained to his doctor, "I've been to three other doctors and none of them agreed with your diagnosis."
The doctor calmly replied, "Just wait until the autopsy, then they'll see that I was right."

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:24:04 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:55:42 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:49:28 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:

I can't remember what I said

...the least of your problems.

At least I know how to operate a newsreader, is there any wonder you can't drive?

Another lie. Lame.

Snipping is trolling.

Awww let's break out the violins for the troll who gets trolled.
Boo-hoo, poor you! Get over yourself, trollboi.

Only gays spell it "boi".

--
A patient complained to his doctor, "I've been to three other doctors and none of them agreed with your diagnosis."
The doctor calmly replied, "Just wait until the autopsy, then they'll see that I was right."

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:24:04 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:55:42 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:49:28 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:

I can't remember what I said

...the least of your problems.

At least I know how to operate a newsreader, is there any wonder you can't drive?

Another lie. Lame.

Snipping is trolling.

Awww let's break out the violins

That's a cliché.

for the troll who gets trolled.
Boo-hoo, poor you! Get over yourself, trollboi.

I have never trolled. I believe every single thing I write.

--
HELP WANTED:
Baiters. Local fishing boats need 4 baiters to bate hooks for tourists. Must have strong hands and work hard. Good pay-$15 per hour, and benefits.
After 6 weeks, 2 best baiters will be promoted to masterbaiters. Apply in person to Jon at the Gulf Marina.

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

In article
,
Muggles wrote:
On 1/21/2016 10:42 PM, nospam wrote:
In article
,
Muggles wrote:

Funny thing happened today as I was at a light waiting for light to
change. I was in the left turn lane facing north, and the highway
traffic coming off the highway heading across my path showed a police
car going past me and the cop driving was talking on his cell phone.

I just shook my head as I watched him drive past me.

Police are allowed to break most traffic laws *IF* it's appropriate for
doing their job (the obvious example being speeding and running red
traffic lights when on an emergency call out). Unfortunately there are
many cases of police being just as moronically stupid as the rest of
the human race and using their cellphone for non-official business
while driving, illegally parking so they can grab a coffee, etc.

At least he wasn't texting and driving.

even better, cops have a laptop sitting right next to them, where they
type and drive all the time, checking license plates or pulling up
information relevant to a call.

I hadn't thought of that! I wonder if that should be illegal while
driving, too.

It is for most people, but as I've said the police have exclusions when
it's part of their job. That said, they rarely use the laptop / iPad
while driving. Such devices are usually used to, for example, quickly
check the details of a car they have just stopped before the police get
out to talk to the driver.

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:21:52 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:55:18 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:46:56 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:49:41 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 23:56:55 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

thickos like you

Personal insults. Not surprised. You lose.

No, an observation that you can't do a simple task like multitasking.

You haven't observed any such thing, liar. You lose.

You're the one that said it was true, did you lie?

You haven't observed my driving. You lose.

So you're admitting your claim was false?

Name the claim I made that was false.

You said it was scientifically proven that people cannot multitask.

Nope. You have a reading comprehension problem. Read what I actually
said again and get back with me. Or don't - I care not. Your trolls are
boring.

You've snipped it, paste it back in.

Go back and read it again. For someone who chides others for supposedly
being novices at Usenet, you sure seem ill equipped... *YAWN*

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:24:04 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:55:42 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:49:28 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:

I can't remember what I said

...the least of your problems.

At least I know how to operate a newsreader, is there any wonder you can't drive?

Another lie. Lame.

Snipping is trolling.

Awww let's break out the violins for the troll who gets trolled.
Boo-hoo, poor you! Get over yourself, trollboi.

Only gays spell it "boi".

Another personal insult. Shocked...

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:34:35 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:21:52 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:55:18 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:46:56 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:49:41 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 23:56:55 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

thickos like you

Personal insults. Not surprised. You lose.

No, an observation that you can't do a simple task like multitasking.

You haven't observed any such thing, liar. You lose.

You're the one that said it was true, did you lie?

You haven't observed my driving. You lose.

So you're admitting your claim was false?

Name the claim I made that was false.

You said it was scientifically proven that people cannot multitask.

Nope. You have a reading comprehension problem. Read what I actually
said again and get back with me. Or don't - I care not. Your trolls are
boring.

You've snipped it, paste it back in.

Go back and read it again. For someone who chides others for supposedly
being novices at Usenet, you sure seem ill equipped... *YAWN*

No, I'm just too lazy to spend time finding the post. If it isn't in the post I'm replying to, then **** off.

--
Peter Hucker is in the top three most intelligent people -- Ron Tompkins, circa 2013.

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:34:56 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:24:04 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:55:42 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:49:28 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:

I can't remember what I said

...the least of your problems.

At least I know how to operate a newsreader, is there any wonder you can't drive?

Another lie. Lame.

Snipping is trolling.

Awww let's break out the violins for the troll who gets trolled.
Boo-hoo, poor you! Get over yourself, trollboi.

Only gays spell it "boi".

Another personal insult. Shocked...

I find it interesting that you think it was an insult. I'll call you homophobic now, or do you call that an insult too?

--
Peter Hucker is in the top three most intelligent people -- Ron Tompkins, circa 2013.

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

In article , Ed
Pawlowski wrote:
On 1/22/2016 12:05 PM, Muggles wrote:

even better, cops have a laptop sitting right next to them, where they
type and drive all the time, checking license plates or pulling up
information relevant to a call.

I hadn't thought of that! I wonder if that should be illegal while
driving, too.

Distracted Driving takes many forms and that would be one. In MA they
are trying to pass a law making anything using hands is illegal.
Specific they mention programming the GPS. Yes, that can be
distracting. Tried it and found it easier and safer to pull over.

All distractions are already covered by "Dangerous Driving" / "Driving
With undue Care" laws. For example, there's no specific law telling you
not to read a book or put on make-up while driving, but you'll still
get ticketed for doing it.

Cellphone specific laws (where appropriate) were created simply to make
it 100% clear to the selfish and the dimbulbs ... but still many morons
ignore those laws, thinking they know better and are "special".

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:34:35 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:21:52 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:55:18 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:46:56 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:49:41 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 23:56:55 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

thickos like you

Personal insults. Not surprised. You lose.

No, an observation that you can't do a simple task like multitasking.

You haven't observed any such thing, liar. You lose.

You're the one that said it was true, did you lie?

You haven't observed my driving. You lose.

So you're admitting your claim was false?

Name the claim I made that was false.

You said it was scientifically proven that people cannot multitask.

Nope. You have a reading comprehension problem. Read what I actually
said again and get back with me. Or don't - I care not. Your trolls are
boring.

You've snipped it, paste it back in.

Go back and read it again. For someone who chides others for supposedly
being novices at Usenet, you sure seem ill equipped... *YAWN*

No, I'm just too lazy to spend time finding the post.

You're too lazy to read for comprehension too; so no surprise there.

**** off.

After you, bozo.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:40:43 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:34:35 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:21:52 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:55:18 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:46:56 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:49:41 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 23:56:55 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

thickos like you

Personal insults. Not surprised. You lose.

No, an observation that you can't do a simple task like multitasking.

You haven't observed any such thing, liar. You lose.

You're the one that said it was true, did you lie?

You haven't observed my driving. You lose.

So you're admitting your claim was false?

Name the claim I made that was false.

You said it was scientifically proven that people cannot multitask.

Nope. You have a reading comprehension problem. Read what I actually
said again and get back with me. Or don't - I care not. Your trolls are
boring.

You've snipped it, paste it back in.

Go back and read it again. For someone who chides others for supposedly
being novices at Usenet, you sure seem ill equipped... *YAWN*

No, I'm just too lazy to spend time finding the post.

You're too lazy to read for comprehension too; so no surprise there.

What you said was quite clear.

**** off.

After you, bozo.

You're the one wanting to discuss your ****ed up paragraph, you go get it.

--
Sex drive: a physical craving that begins in adolescence and ends at marriage.

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:34:56 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:24:04 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:55:42 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:49:28 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:

I can't remember what I said

...the least of your problems.

At least I know how to operate a newsreader, is there any wonder you can't drive?

Another lie. Lame.

Snipping is trolling.

Awww let's break out the violins for the troll who gets trolled.
Boo-hoo, poor you! Get over yourself, trollboi.

Only gays spell it "boi".

Another personal insult. Shocked...

I find it interesting that you think it was an insult.

You said it for a reason; and that reason is ultra-clear to anyone with
a brain. So not only are you a hater bigot, but you are also a coward
for not standing behind your word. You make your momma proud, silly boy.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:40:43 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:34:35 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:21:52 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:55:18 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:46:56 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:49:41 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 23:56:55 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

thickos like you

Personal insults. Not surprised. You lose.

No, an observation that you can't do a simple task like multitasking.

You haven't observed any such thing, liar. You lose.

You're the one that said it was true, did you lie?

You haven't observed my driving. You lose.

So you're admitting your claim was false?

Name the claim I made that was false.

You said it was scientifically proven that people cannot multitask.

Nope. You have a reading comprehension problem. Read what I actually
said again and get back with me. Or don't - I care not. Your trolls are
boring.

You've snipped it, paste it back in.

Go back and read it again. For someone who chides others for supposedly
being novices at Usenet, you sure seem ill equipped... *YAWN*

No, I'm just too lazy to spend time finding the post.

You're too lazy to read for comprehension too; so no surprise there.

What you said was quite clear.

Yet you got it wrong, and even after being told you got it wrong, you
continue to claim I said something I did not say, which says a lot about
you.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On 01/22/2016 09:54 AM, nospam wrote:
In ,
wrote:

and airplanes. nothing sucks more than a screaming baby nearby, or
worse, in the next seat.

And how do you suggest we ban 'crying babies'?
easy. have baby flights and no baby flights.

Crying babies don't bother me a bit. If they did, I'd just pop in some ear plugs.


What really cheeses me off are fat people that take up a seat and a half.

Or the airlines that charge extra for luggage that's 5 lbs overweight but
the 5' butterball that weighs 300 lbs and takes up a seat and half
is not penalized.

Or the Neanderthal that sits with its legs spread 90 degrees so its knees
are over in my seating space.

They finally found proof texting bans - does it make a difference
 

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:43:43 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:34:56 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:24:04 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:55:42 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:49:28 -0000, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2016-01-22, Mr Macaw wrote:

I can't remember what I said

...the least of your problems.

At least I know how to operate a newsreader, is there any wonder you can't drive?

Another lie. Lame.

Snipping is trolling.

Awww let's break out the violins for the troll who gets trolled.
Boo-hoo, poor you! Get over yourself, trollboi.

Only gays spell it "boi".

Another personal insult. Shocked...

I find it interesting that you think it was an insult.

You said it for a reason; and that reason is ultra-clear to anyone with
a brain. So not only are you a hater bigot, but you are also a coward
for not standing behind your word. You make your momma proud, silly boy.

No, I made an observation. Your sexual insecurity made you read too much into it.

--
We cannot see the future.
We cannot change the past.
We can only live in the now, with an eye towards gaining enough
power in the future to wreak revenge on everyone who ever screwed
us in the past.