Wednesday, February 18, 2004
I think they passed a new law in my area stating that you can drive as badly as you like, so long as you have a cell phone stuck to your ear.
Three times *this week* (so far) some idiot unable to drive and talk at the same time, almost hit me while making a wide turn (using enough room as if they were driving a semi, when they actually had a compact or dreaded suv), or, as in the case yesterday, making a completely illegal turn, not once, but *twice* in the same minute.
Where's a cop when shit like that happens? I wonder. This is getting completely out of hand. Most people can't drive very well even if that's all they're actually concentrating on! But people on phones?! That's just an accident waiting to happen. And it's getting much worse. I used to complain about being stuck behind an oldster. (What's an "oldster"? An oldster is someone very old, driving v-e-r-y s--l--o--w). These days, I prefer driving behind an oldster, than to have a cell phone yielding asshole anywhere near me. (And especially not *behind*, they're NOT paying attention.)
I think some states have actually passed laws making it illegal to talk & drive (New York is one I think, or at least, they require a hands-free set up). I wish my state were one of them. (And if it happens to already be, it would be nice if it were enforced. Unlike speed limits. pft.)
And although it's probably impossible to ever implement (with an over-population problem, definitely), and many would hate it, but *considering* the horrendous way most people do happen to drive their vehicles (or tanks, or monstrosities too huge for words) these days, I think there should be a required Re-Testing of licensed drivers every 5-10 years. Something proving the person can in fact, still actually drive. It shouldn't be the same as passports where you need to just renew your photo to show how you've aged. Not a popular stance, surely. But one that might spare some lives. Especially the life of someone *you* happen to care for and/or love.
(0) comments
Three times *this week* (so far) some idiot unable to drive and talk at the same time, almost hit me while making a wide turn (using enough room as if they were driving a semi, when they actually had a compact or dreaded suv), or, as in the case yesterday, making a completely illegal turn, not once, but *twice* in the same minute.
Where's a cop when shit like that happens? I wonder. This is getting completely out of hand. Most people can't drive very well even if that's all they're actually concentrating on! But people on phones?! That's just an accident waiting to happen. And it's getting much worse. I used to complain about being stuck behind an oldster. (What's an "oldster"? An oldster is someone very old, driving v-e-r-y s--l--o--w). These days, I prefer driving behind an oldster, than to have a cell phone yielding asshole anywhere near me. (And especially not *behind*, they're NOT paying attention.)
I think some states have actually passed laws making it illegal to talk & drive (New York is one I think, or at least, they require a hands-free set up). I wish my state were one of them. (And if it happens to already be, it would be nice if it were enforced. Unlike speed limits. pft.)
And although it's probably impossible to ever implement (with an over-population problem, definitely), and many would hate it, but *considering* the horrendous way most people do happen to drive their vehicles (or tanks, or monstrosities too huge for words) these days, I think there should be a required Re-Testing of licensed drivers every 5-10 years. Something proving the person can in fact, still actually drive. It shouldn't be the same as passports where you need to just renew your photo to show how you've aged. Not a popular stance, surely. But one that might spare some lives. Especially the life of someone *you* happen to care for and/or love.
(0) comments
Friday, February 13, 2004
Silly. And Weird. But sometimes the antics of Mike Donovan are amusing. A toon that's not a toon at all. I especially liked the Create Your Own Comic section. A perfect place to be a wiseass. Or laugh at someone else's attemt to be one.
(0) comments
(0) comments
Tuesday, February 03, 2004
Everyone on the radio was talking about it (probably on TV too, but I wasn't paying attention). Even some at work, but I expected it, what else is there to talk about? Why not live vicariously through the lives of overpaid sports figures? I just wanted to see what the big deal was. I certainly didn't watch the stupor-bowl. I couldn't care less! Aside from the commercial hype (and the over-hyped commercials), and the change in TV scheduling, I wouldn't even know it was on. (And again, I couldn't care less!)
I checked several US news sites (MSNBC, CNN, which had a video but I couldn't see it, even Google, images, archives, news, which has it now, but not from a US news site, etc.) and couldn't find a picture of the actual "shocker." (Seriously, it wasn't a big deal at all, and no accident. What woman wears a pointy star-shaped nipple tassle all the time under her clothes for no reason? Ok well, hm... maybe some do. But on TV? Ummm, yea, best not go there) I couldn't find an actual picture on any US news site. All I wanted was a damn picture. Jeez. Oh sure, found "some" pictures, but not of the actual event, that had all the radio/tv people talking. (and days later too) Which shouldn't be a surprise.
We're so uptight about our bodies aren't we? TV censors refuse to allow anything overly explicit, (omg, an actual bare ass on NYPD! nono! can't show that before 10pm!! no one has that! eek!), and what little we do show, like surprisingly graphic reenactments on shows like CSI, or the occasional bare ass, or side-view of a breast (omg! really? in the US!? on prime time TV!? no way!) on NYPD, (And usually just one such instance per show, if at all. Is there a limit?) can only be shown after 10pm. (When the kiddies should be in bed! Yea right.)
So did I find what I was looking for? Yes, eventually, on Ananova, here, and now here. Leave it to the Brits (or maybe Europe, and the entire rest of the world in general) to not be so uptight about something we all have. (We all have naked bodies under our clothes, don't we?) Good for them. Maybe if we were a little more open, less restrictive about such supposedly natural things, there wouldn't be so many (pregnancies people for one thing, ever hear of condoms???) sexually related problems. Maybe.
That said, since I am an American, and even knowing how uptight a society we live in over here, I can't help but still be surprised sometimes at what gets shown (anytime!) on TV in Europe. Even the commercials. But you know what? After a while, that surprise decreases, and it just becomes "normal." Which is how it should be.
Of course, maybe that leads to desensitizing, and the bad things *that* can lead to. But that's another matter. For another blogger. :)
(0) comments
I checked several US news sites (MSNBC, CNN, which had a video but I couldn't see it, even Google, images, archives, news, which has it now, but not from a US news site, etc.) and couldn't find a picture of the actual "shocker." (Seriously, it wasn't a big deal at all, and no accident. What woman wears a pointy star-shaped nipple tassle all the time under her clothes for no reason? Ok well, hm... maybe some do. But on TV? Ummm, yea, best not go there) I couldn't find an actual picture on any US news site. All I wanted was a damn picture. Jeez. Oh sure, found "some" pictures, but not of the actual event, that had all the radio/tv people talking. (and days later too) Which shouldn't be a surprise.
We're so uptight about our bodies aren't we? TV censors refuse to allow anything overly explicit, (omg, an actual bare ass on NYPD! nono! can't show that before 10pm!! no one has that! eek!), and what little we do show, like surprisingly graphic reenactments on shows like CSI, or the occasional bare ass, or side-view of a breast (omg! really? in the US!? on prime time TV!? no way!) on NYPD, (And usually just one such instance per show, if at all. Is there a limit?) can only be shown after 10pm. (When the kiddies should be in bed! Yea right.)
So did I find what I was looking for? Yes, eventually, on Ananova, here, and now here. Leave it to the Brits (or maybe Europe, and the entire rest of the world in general) to not be so uptight about something we all have. (We all have naked bodies under our clothes, don't we?) Good for them. Maybe if we were a little more open, less restrictive about such supposedly natural things, there wouldn't be so many (pregnancies people for one thing, ever hear of condoms???) sexually related problems. Maybe.
That said, since I am an American, and even knowing how uptight a society we live in over here, I can't help but still be surprised sometimes at what gets shown (anytime!) on TV in Europe. Even the commercials. But you know what? After a while, that surprise decreases, and it just becomes "normal." Which is how it should be.
Of course, maybe that leads to desensitizing, and the bad things *that* can lead to. But that's another matter. For another blogger. :)
(0) comments
