|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Steve Chapple writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > > The argument advanced by some that there is a clear and present danger
> > > so strong that we have to ban SUVs a priori isn't supportable...
>
> " a priori " ???
Sorry, that Canadian education must have been letting you down:
http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=a%20priori
(meaning #3 sense 1: Made before or without examination)
> Some basic rules/safety standards should be in place. That,
> after all is the purpose of government.
Really? I wasn't aware that government was responsible for making the world
safe. I don't see it in OUR constitution that government is responsible for
setting the pinout voltage levels of the RS-232 (which is a basic
rule/standard), or is responsible for setting the voltage levels we get from
our power poles (which have a lot to do with safety), either. Defacto
regulation of things doesn't make it dejure, or even a good idea.
> We collectively agree that
> we'll drive on the right side of the road, that red lights mean stop,
> that you have to pass certain standards to operate the motor vehicle
> on public property, that insurance is required, that all vehicles meet
> certain safety standards, (like having the same bumper height...) etc.
Why, if these are good ideas, is it necessary for there to be regulation? And
if they're not actually good ideas, why is it a good thing that they are
mandated just the same? c.f. regulation of how much bone slivers can be
present in my hot dogs. Absent that regulation, meat companies would compete
on how little they had, or not having any at all, but now that we have a
minimum standard, they all don't bother to mention how much is in there any
more. Regulated standards ensure mediocrity because no one tries to exceed
them, there's no market advantage in doing so.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 5 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
26 Messages in This Thread: ![Re: I'm lucky to be alive -Steve Chapple (8-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![Re: I'm lucky to be alive -Dave Schuler (8-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: I'm lucky to be alive -Steve Chapple (20-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![Re: I'm lucky to be alive -Larry Pieniazek (20-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: I'm lucky to be alive -Richard Marchetti (21-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: I'm lucky to be alive -Frank Filz (21-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: I'm lucky to be alive -Dave Schuler (21-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be a priori banned -Larry Pieniazek (21-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![Re: Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be a priori banned -Richard Marchetti (21-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![Re: Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be a priori banned -Frank Filz (22-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![Re: Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be a priori banned -Larry Pieniazek (22-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be a priori banned -Larry Pieniazek (22-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/268.gif) ![Nuke Boston (was Re: Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be...) -Steve Chapple (22-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![You are here](/news/here.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![Re: Nuke Boston (was Re: Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be...) -Dave Schuler (22-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Nuke Boston (was Re: Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be...) -Frank Filz (23-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/268.gif) ![Re: Nuke Boston (was Re: Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be...) -Eric Joslin (22-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Nuke Boston (was Re: Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be...) -Larry Pieniazek (23-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/268.gif) ![Re: Nuke Boston (was Re: Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be...) -Scott Edward Sanburn (22-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/268.gif) ![Re: Nuke Boston (was Re: Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be...) -Steve Chapple (22-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![Re: Nuke Boston (was Re: Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be...) -Todd Lehman (22-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Nuke Boston (was Re: Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be...) -Steve Chapple (28-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![Re: Nuke Boston (was Re: Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be...) -Larry Pieniazek (23-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![Re: Nuke Boston (was Re: Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be...) -Richard Marchetti (24-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![Re: Nuke Boston (was Re: Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be...) -Larry Pieniazek (22-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![Re: Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be a priori banned -Dave Schuler (22-Sep-00 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|