Michael,
you demonstrate an interesting concept. Where is the dividing
line between changing the fuel mis[Dxture in our cars to pass an
itting an illeagla[D[D[D[D[D[Dea[Dgel [D[D[D[D[D[D[Dllegal
fraudulent act to pass
an emmision test. It appears that there is a sort of "delta"
involved. In the first case the assumption is that the car
will almost pass but not quite. So slightly changing the
fuel mixture (carb settings) in order to pass the emmission
testi[D can be justified especially if it can be seen as a game.
The delta of leagal [D[D[D[D[Dgal - [D[D[D[D[D[D[D[Dhonest -
dishonest seems rather small. In the
second case there is no game[D[D[D[D"game". There is no case of almost
passing the test. There is no consideration of the law. I
believe attornies[D[D[Deys call this "theft by deception".
In Georgia I don't have to pass an emmission test with my MG.
When I do, I certainly will tune the carbs to max efficiency,
use the highest test fuel, warm the car up well......I will
put my best foot forward. I believe that is legal. The scenario
you dec[Dscribed with the BMW is not exactly putting your best foot
forward. It is just fraud[D[D[D[D[Dillegal fraud. What stunned me is
that you
[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[C[C[C[C[C
[D[D[D[D[D[DI wish I had sent this only to
you but on the other hand [D, it probably doesm[Dn't hurt any of us to
consider a different view point. It appears from your last
sentences that you disagreed [D with his actions. I guess all of our
fathers pulled some strange stunts at one time or other, but
they are still our fathers. [D[D[D[D[C and therefore deserved[D our
respect.
'some early morning thoughts from the Bible Belt !
Don Mathis
|