You are so right. My head is usually in "reality", unlike yours. Perhaps
you should give it a try, you may like it.
Oh, I don't know. Does the phrase "A MOUNTAIN OF DEAD BODIES" ring a bell?
No, you are the one who believes motor vehicles having there lights on in
broad daylight makes them *harder* to see.
Sorry, Sharon. The game is over. You have lost. Your pitiful attempt to
convince people based on lies, and unproven (or even sensible) information,
has failed. Good night, and as Larry says, God Bless.
Think what you want, Larry. The fact is, all of Sharon's "facts" have been
proven to be either false, or have actually led to pro-DRL.
Oh, I pay attention Larry. I pay attention to things like you snipping text
you don't want to respond too. I pay attention to the links you provide,
which at times are actually pro-DRL. And, then I pay attention to you lying
I was done posting to you, as you can't have a discussion without lies. As
for Sharon, I felt the need to respond to her last post.
Good night, Larry.
Everyone snips comments, you can't keep the whole thread in each
posting. You also cannot be expected to respond to every single thing
in every single post. I appreciate your commenting, however I don't
appreciate being called a liar, that is not appropriate.
Thanks for your time,
Cut the crap, Larry. How can you expect people to have honest debates with
you, when you can't even tell the truth? And, yes. Snipping happens, but
it's not appropriate to snip information, only because you don't want to
respond to it.
You know what? It's been fun. I came into this thread not caring weather
cars have DRL's or not. I figured, my car has them, but your's doesn't. So
what? I gave your side a chance, yet you can't keep your facts straight,
and the only reason I call you a liar is because you are one. Or, at least
you are on Usenet. What you are in real life, I honestly don't know.
Knight, obviously, you don't understand that you are clearly pro DRL,
you can view your comments that I posted above. You are on record with
multiple comments in support of DRLs. You claim to not care and to be
neutral, that doesn't seem to be the case.
You can call me whatever you want, it doesn't make it true. I know how
you have acted and that is all I need to know.
Being for or against DRL's is very different from calling the info you site
BS. I could not possibly care less if cars have DRL's or not. All I am
saying is your arguments don't usually match up. Some of them don't even
make any sense. If you call that "Pro-DRL", then you are going to find a
*lot* of people who are Pro.
So, you know that I have not lied, and you have. Good for you, Larry. And
you don't need me saying you have lied to prove it. Just re-read your
It is clear where your loyalties are, you cannot hide that anymore.
I don't know if, in your own mind, you actually believe that you are
reasonable, and at this point I don't care. I didn't call you a liar,
you called me that. I am simply calling you out for what you stated so
clearly in multiple postings, live with it.
I won't be called a liar by you especially. I see no point in
continuing to include you in this conversation.
L> Hey Knight, greetings there. I am only addressing the U.S. marketL> specifically. Sharon referenced the different elevation and ambientL> light differences and I agree with that assessment. Things areL> different down here and the discussion is mainly about the U.S. I amL> sorry that you did not realize this.
I would have thought that ambient conditions in US border cities would not
differ materially from those in the adjacent Canadian border cities. For
example: Detroit vs. Windsor, Sault Michigan vs. Sault Ontario, Niagara
Falls NY vs. Niagara Falls Ont. , Buffalo NY vs. Fort Erie Ont. Perhaps you
can enlighten me. DRL's work effectively and are well received in Canada,
where 90% of the population lives within 200 miles of the US border.
It always fills me with a sense of wonder at how obstinate some people can
be with respect to any perceived restriction on their freedom to choose
unsafe practices over safer ones. Other debates have dragged on endlessly
about the merits of motorcycle helmets, or the use of air bags, or the use
of seat belts. If one tries hard enough one can usually unearth isolated
instances where an initiative may have an adverse outcome. These instances
are then seized upon to support the notion that the initiatives should be
abandoned despite ample evidence of their effectiveness in most situations.
Just my $0.02
Good point on the border cities, there really isn't much difference
between them and the corresponding cities in Canada. I am down south
and there is a difference, but on the border, I just don't know how it
could be that different.
Thanks for your comment. You are saying what? I don't see you
presenting any "reasons" and "evidence", just more of the same attempt
to break down others instead of coming up with a solid viewpoint to
And how many people have been killed by air bags, or seatbelts? Your
arguments are pretty weak.
Weak, once again.
This has to be one of the lamest excuses I have ever heard (again). Are you
trying to tell me that you can't tell the difference between a car with
DRL's on, and a Police car with flashing red (or whichever color in your
State) lights? That, and if an emergency vehicle is in that much of a rush,
they have these neat things that make noise too.
Go back to school and get smarter.
You should, and she is. At least, from what I have seen on this topic.
Every point you make is bullshit. How do you expect to be taken seriously?
Hey Knight, you prove my point, you contribute nothing and call names
and curse. And you expect to be taken seriously, right, LOL. I won't
be replying specifically to your comments, there is nothing there to
actually respond to, ROTFLOL.
Yes ,GLARE! Even the output from a focused beam PENLIGHT can temporarily
blind someone if it's shining directly in your eyes. FYI: the "reduced
intensity" high beams on some GM cars (and most notably the inboard
lights on a Saturn) with engines running will put out over 7,000
candela, ABOVE the threshold of "discomfort glare", into the range of
1- I had a 1999 Canadian built American car called a Chevy Cavalier with
standard DRLs. Could you tell me how mny gallons of gas I've wasted because
of my DRLs over a 7 year period?
2- Personally I would rather see all cars with DRLs rather than not see one
coming at me out of a rainstorm, a fog or from around a sharp two-lane
highway curve in overcast without any lights, which they "forgot" to turn
on! I can send you a copy of the accident and hospital reports to verify the
results if you would like?
At what distance? Sure, if you are inches away it is bright, but light
decreases rapidly with distance. How close to you actually get to those
lights while driving? Admittedly, not every light is properly aimed, but
night or day that is a problem. Use the numbers correctly and get back to
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.