IPod Oblivious - Page 2 - Political Forum

presluc · 02-13-2007, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brother Oz

Well they have to protect the tax-payers, otherwise who'll pay them?

But not all taxpayers want that much protection, in fact a lot of us don't.

presluc · 02-13-2007, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by emptypepsi

You put on an iPod and don't pay attention to your surroundings and get hit by a car. So this is new step we're taking in protecting morons, huh? Jesus, what a load of crap. All I see with banning Trans Fats and banning not paying attention and banning marijuana and banning this, that and the other are the words Nineteen-eighty-four.

Your post sounds vaguely familiar, could it be we have discussed baning this and baning that before like in a trans fats thread you did.
If I remember correctly I asked then how much baning is enough.
Appariently we haven't reached it yet. DAMN!!!

GreatScott · 03-01-2007, 08:43 PM

Ignorance is no excuse when it comes to breaking the law, can you imagine visiting NY, not knowing anything about this and being fined. You'd probably think you were on Candid Camera or some crazy person was pretending to be a cop. That's the most insane proposal I've ever heard!

Izzibeth · 03-02-2007, 11:11 AM

Honestly, as I said, I really don't think this law is going to be enforced in any way except to prevent people who get hit by cars from suing other people for hitting them when they were listening to their iPod or talking on the phone when they got hit (i.e. not paying attention). This is really impossible to enforce (there are way too many people and not enough police to worry about such a trivial thing) and although I'm all about not banning stupid things..... I think they have it "banned" as a protection... not as an enforcible law.

presluc · 03-02-2007, 02:05 PM

Do you mean like the question of condoms in high schools??

emptypepsi · 03-03-2007, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by presluc

Your post sounds vaguely familiar, could it be we have discussed baning this and baning that before like in a trans fats thread you did.
If I remember correctly I asked then how much baning is enough.
Appariently we haven't reached it yet. DAMN!!!

We did. The more our society gets to stupid-proofing ourselves, the worse we are going to get. I'm sure there will be bans on not exercising, bans on not reading enough, bans on saying certain words -- *GASP*, that's already happening in some parts of the country! Ay, ay, ay!

presluc · 03-04-2007, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by emptypepsi

We did. The more our society gets to stupid-proofing ourselves, the worse we are going to get. I'm sure there will be bans on not exercising, bans on not reading enough, bans on saying certain words -- *GASP*, that's already happening in some parts of the country! Ay, ay, ay!

Well, I was going to tell you in certain words what I think of the xxxxx-
People that thought this up but I did not hear about the bans on saying certain words.
So I guess you 'll have to think of the worst phrase you've ever heard.
NOW GO WORSE.

presluc · 03-04-2007, 01:12 PM

Izzibeth, [sorry to get of track guys}
I kinda used your post for an idea I had about a new thread called
'"Law Suits a consipiarcy theory" I hope you don't mind.