C.H. wrote:
> On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 06:02:10 -0700, N8N wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > C.H. wrote:
>
> >> If you thought it was a safety hazard of the magnitude DS and JR
> >> postulate, you would.
> >>
> > I think they are both safety hazards, as I've repeatedly stated in this
> > group before. It must be nice to be independently wealthy to the point
> > that one could do as you suggest.
>
> You can do a great many things. Find another job that doesn't require you
> to travel great distances in a dangerous DRL-automobile. Find another job,
> that will give you a non-DRL company car. Buy a beater and bill the
> company (I have never heard of a company that won't let you use your car
> and bill them for mileage). Might actually make you a few bucks.
>
> Chris

You're just being delibnerately argumentative. First, most of the
safety issues can be easily overcome by simply running low beam
headlights 24/7 (although that doesn't get rid of the problem that the
headlights are impossible to turn off completely, I probably won't be
visiting guarded gov't facilities anymore) and secondly, if your
suggestions were as easy to implement as you seem to imply, don't you
think I would have done so already?

nate