[Top] [All Lists]

Re[2]: Spridget wanted.. rant..

To: Lester Ewing <lewing@sport.rr.com>
Subject: Re[2]: Spridget wanted.. rant..
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 18:20:54 -0700
Cc: spridgets <spridgets@autox.team.net>
References: <33972e3bc73b9434dbf07a8de19e06f9@valentinephoto.net> <002901c54880$9c65faf0$5620ea3f@D1PWFG61> <7a9c1fd081692ad6accc77aceceb41d7@sport.rr.com>
Hello Lester,

       just a difference of philosophy here, i guess, and MOST of
       present day society in america tends toward your view. .. don't
       let people have things that COULD be dangerous. don't let them
       decide for themselves the risk factors. make everything as
       accident/idiot proof as is possible, (and then be sued when it
       fails to live up to the [impossible] expectations of absolute

       rather than giving a kid a tank that can withstand anything
       short of an atomic blast, with the full expectation that he
       will then TEST it to "just to see" to it limits, i think its
       fine to give them a delicate piece of equipment, and teach them
       to respect its limits...

       my daughter is learning how to drive IN THE HEALEY. she is well
       schooled in the FACT that if she crashes, she will DIE.
       accident avoidance is what i beleive in teaching, not accident
       "surviveability". ...

       again just a difference of opinion, no flame intended.

Best regards,
 Bill                            mailto:pythias@pacifier.com
   "66 Sprite

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>