On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 14:58:30 -1000, dsi1
> wrote:

> On 8/10/2014 1:20 PM, Mayo wrote:
> > Dang, that's a Cheech and Chong flic in the making!
> >
> > I'd sure buy the tickets and popcorn.
>
> I'm hoping for a big to-do and lots of action. The woman upstairs is a
> pretty, attractive, gal or at least, was more so ten years ago. All the
> married women, including my wife, in this condo do not like her. All the
> married men, including me, think she's ok. Near as I can figure, the
> women don't like her on general principle because of her looks. You'd
> think she was beating her kids or cooking up meth in her kitchen. I used
> to think she might be a hooker but I come to find out she manages an
> office so that ain't it. :-)

Oh, come on! Women (especially those in a secure marriage) don't
dislike other women based only on how they look. You need to dig a
little deeper.


--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 15:25:12 -1000, dsi1
> wrote:

> On 8/10/2014 1:34 PM, wrote:
> >
> > They were talking on our radio that with the further acceptance of pot
> > it is going to raise a lot queries. One was DUI but the problem with
> > that is that nothing short of a blood test shows mj use. So I expect
> > the corrections officer easily passes any urine test
> >
> Decriminalization of marijuana seems to be in the stars for North
> America. Self-driving cars also appears to be in our future. This pretty
> much means that DUIs will be a non-issue. Ain't technology wonderful?

Car sex will also be on the table as will knitting and other singular
activities.
>
> www.youtube.com/watch?v=he4DGLGiI3E



--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On 8/10/2014 11:03 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 14:58:30 -1000, dsi1
> > wrote:
>
>> On 8/10/2014 1:20 PM, Mayo wrote:
>>> Dang, that's a Cheech and Chong flic in the making!
>>>
>>> I'd sure buy the tickets and popcorn.
>>
>> I'm hoping for a big to-do and lots of action. The woman upstairs is a
>> pretty, attractive, gal or at least, was more so ten years ago. All the
>> married women, including my wife, in this condo do not like her. All the
>> married men, including me, think she's ok. Near as I can figure, the
>> women don't like her on general principle because of her looks. You'd
>> think she was beating her kids or cooking up meth in her kitchen. I used
>> to think she might be a hooker but I come to find out she manages an
>> office so that ain't it. :-)
>
> Oh, come on! Women (especially those in a secure marriage) don't
> dislike other women based only on how they look. You need to dig a
> little deeper.
>
>
Could this be a den of insecure mariages?

I mean, it happens.

On 8/10/2014 11:07 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 15:25:12 -1000, dsi1
> > wrote:
>
>> On 8/10/2014 1:34 PM, wrote:
>>>
>>> They were talking on our radio that with the further acceptance of pot
>>> it is going to raise a lot queries. One was DUI but the problem with
>>> that is that nothing short of a blood test shows mj use. So I expect
>>> the corrections officer easily passes any urine test
>>>
>> Decriminalization of marijuana seems to be in the stars for North
>> America. Self-driving cars also appears to be in our future. This pretty
>> much means that DUIs will be a non-issue. Ain't technology wonderful?
>
> Car sex will also be on the table as will knitting and other singular
> activities.

Oh boy...

I haven't had a "necker knob" on my wheel in decades, now what?

On 8/10/2014 4:27 PM, Mayo wrote:
> On 8/10/2014 7:25 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>> On 8/10/2014 1:34 PM, wrote:
>>>
>>> They were talking on our radio that with the further acceptance of pot
>>> it is going to raise a lot queries. One was DUI but the problem with
>>> that is that nothing short of a blood test shows mj use. So I expect
>>> the corrections officer easily passes any urine test
>>>
>> Decriminalization of marijuana seems to be in the stars for North
>> America. Self-driving cars also appears to be in our future. This pretty
>> much means that DUIs will be a non-issue. Ain't technology wonderful?
>>
>> www.youtube.com/watch?v=he4DGLGiI3E
>
> Since you put it that way!

In the future, people will find it hard to believe that we used to have
such car-nage on our highways. Traveling by car will be as safe as on
public transportation. Well, that's what I hope anyway.

On 8/10/2014 7:03 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 14:58:30 -1000, dsi1
> > wrote:
>
>> On 8/10/2014 1:20 PM, Mayo wrote:
>>> Dang, that's a Cheech and Chong flic in the making!
>>>
>>> I'd sure buy the tickets and popcorn.
>>
>> I'm hoping for a big to-do and lots of action. The woman upstairs is a
>> pretty, attractive, gal or at least, was more so ten years ago. All the
>> married women, including my wife, in this condo do not like her. All the
>> married men, including me, think she's ok. Near as I can figure, the
>> women don't like her on general principle because of her looks. You'd
>> think she was beating her kids or cooking up meth in her kitchen. I used
>> to think she might be a hooker but I come to find out she manages an
>> office so that ain't it. :-)
>
> Oh, come on! Women (especially those in a secure marriage) don't
> dislike other women based only on how they look. You need to dig a
> little deeper.
>
>

Your statement sounds reasonable but I've grilled my wife on why she
dislikes this woman and the truth is so deeply buried that even she
can't say.

On 8/10/2014 7:07 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 15:25:12 -1000, dsi1
> > wrote:
>
>> On 8/10/2014 1:34 PM, wrote:
>>>
>>> They were talking on our radio that with the further acceptance of pot
>>> it is going to raise a lot queries. One was DUI but the problem with
>>> that is that nothing short of a blood test shows mj use. So I expect
>>> the corrections officer easily passes any urine test
>>>
>> Decriminalization of marijuana seems to be in the stars for North
>> America. Self-driving cars also appears to be in our future. This pretty
>> much means that DUIs will be a non-issue. Ain't technology wonderful?
>
> Car sex will also be on the table as will knitting and other singular
> activities.
>>
>> www.youtube.com/watch?v=he4DGLGiI3E
>
>
>

"Breaking in" a car will have a whole 'nother meaning. :-)

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 14:58:30 -1000, dsi1
> > wrote:
>
>> On 8/10/2014 1:20 PM, Mayo wrote:
>> > Dang, that's a Cheech and Chong flic in the making!
>> >
>> > I'd sure buy the tickets and popcorn.
>>
>> I'm hoping for a big to-do and lots of action. The woman upstairs is a
>> pretty, attractive, gal or at least, was more so ten years ago. All the
>> married women, including my wife, in this condo do not like her. All the
>> married men, including me, think she's ok. Near as I can figure, the
>> women don't like her on general principle because of her looks. You'd
>> think she was beating her kids or cooking up meth in her kitchen. I used
>> to think she might be a hooker but I come to find out she manages an
>> office so that ain't it. :-)
>
> Oh, come on! Women (especially those in a secure marriage) don't
> dislike other women based only on how they look. You need to dig a
> little deeper.

Yeah. Really! There aren't too many people that I dislike. When I do it
is usually because they are mean or dishonest.

"dsi1" > wrote in message
...
> On 8/10/2014 7:03 PM, sf wrote:
>> On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 14:58:30 -1000, dsi1
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/10/2014 1:20 PM, Mayo wrote:
>>>> Dang, that's a Cheech and Chong flic in the making!
>>>>
>>>> I'd sure buy the tickets and popcorn.
>>>
>>> I'm hoping for a big to-do and lots of action. The woman upstairs is a
>>> pretty, attractive, gal or at least, was more so ten years ago. All the
>>> married women, including my wife, in this condo do not like her. All the
>>> married men, including me, think she's ok. Near as I can figure, the
>>> women don't like her on general principle because of her looks. You'd
>>> think she was beating her kids or cooking up meth in her kitchen. I used
>>> to think she might be a hooker but I come to find out she manages an
>>> office so that ain't it. :-)
>>
>> Oh, come on! Women (especially those in a secure marriage) don't
>> dislike other women based only on how they look. You need to dig a
>> little deeper.
>>
>>
>
> Your statement sounds reasonable but I've grilled my wife on why she
> dislikes this woman and the truth is so deeply buried that even she can't
> say.

Or maybe she just doesn't want to badmouth her. I had a friend who was
doing things that I didn't like. I won't get into what here. I let her go
but she continued to be friends with other of my friends. And from what I
have heard, she is no longer doing those things. I will never be a good
friend of hers now but I will be cordial. I also won't go around spouting
off to everyone what it was that she did.

"dsi1" > wrote in message
...
> On 8/10/2014 11:20 AM, wrote:
>>
>> Just a young guy next to me, maybe 30, but a serious working type,
>> definitely would be amazed if he smoked pot or anything else.
>>
> The folks upstairs are a married couple - the woman runs a medical office
> and the guy is a corrections officer with the state. I can't say how that
> works - I thought the state does random drug testing on their officers.
> OTOH, my guess is that most of those guys are potheads and firing
> everybody for marijuana would cause serious problems.
>
> The daughter of this couple used clean her rabbit cage by dumping bunny
> shit out of her window and it would rain down next to our window. Ha ha
> that was awfully piggish of her. I can take a little pot smoke but I draw
> the line at bunny rabbit crap. Oh yeah, we narked on her ass. I think the
> whole family is on drugs. The woman's on the board too.
>
> The new resident manager is a young, overly tense, Asian dude that maybe
> takes his job a little too seriously. He passed out notices saying that
> pot smoking will not be tolerated in the condo. I don't know how he plans
> on enforcing this restriction but I'm just waiting for these two to clash.
> That could be of great entertainment value for me. :-)

Do report back if and when ...)

--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

On 8/11/2014 1:56 AM, dsi1 wrote:
> On 8/10/2014 4:27 PM, Mayo wrote:
>> On 8/10/2014 7:25 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>>> On 8/10/2014 1:34 PM, wrote:
>>>>
>>>> They were talking on our radio that with the further acceptance of pot
>>>> it is going to raise a lot queries. One was DUI but the problem with
>>>> that is that nothing short of a blood test shows mj use. So I expect
>>>> the corrections officer easily passes any urine test
>>>>
>>> Decriminalization of marijuana seems to be in the stars for North
>>> America. Self-driving cars also appears to be in our future. This pretty
>>> much means that DUIs will be a non-issue. Ain't technology wonderful?
>>>
>>> www.youtube.com/watch?v=he4DGLGiI3E
>>
>> Since you put it that way!
>
> In the future, people will find it hard to believe that we used to have
> such car-nage on our highways. Traveling by car will be as safe as on
> public transportation. Well, that's what I hope anyway.

The resistance will be strong - I avoid adaptive cruise control because
it feels wrong top let the slower car on the freeway set my speed.

On 8/10/2014 11:14 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
>
> Or maybe she just doesn't want to badmouth her. I had a friend who was
> doing things that I didn't like. I won't get into what here. I let her
> go but she continued to be friends with other of my friends. And from
> what I have heard, she is no longer doing those things. I will never be
> a good friend of hers now but I will be cordial. I also won't go around
> spouting off to everyone what it was that she did.

My wife has no trouble badmouthing this woman. I haven't found out the
reason for this. Perhaps there is no reason.

On 8/11/2014 1:30 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>
>
> Do report back if and when ...)
>

You'll get the play by play action. :-)

On 8/11/2014 5:50 AM, Mayo wrote:
>
> The resistance will be strong - I avoid adaptive cruise control because
> it feels wrong top let the slower car on the freeway set my speed.

Resistance is futile. Who the heck wanted air bags and front wheel
drive? Nobody.

On 8/11/2014 11:29 AM, dsi1 wrote:
> On 8/11/2014 5:50 AM, Mayo wrote:
>>
>> The resistance will be strong - I avoid adaptive cruise control because
>> it feels wrong top let the slower car on the freeway set my speed.
>
> Resistance is futile. Who the heck wanted air bags and front wheel
> drive? Nobody.

Point taken.

In fact it may be that urban congestion is the fulcrum this balances
upon, and we know that's not getting any better.

"dsi1" > wrote in message
...
> On 8/11/2014 1:30 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>>
>>
>> Do report back if and when ...)
>>
>
> You'll get the play by play action. :-)

Thankewverymuch ;-)

--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

On 8/11/2014 11:37 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>
>
> "dsi1" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 8/11/2014 1:30 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Do report back if and when ...)
>>>
>>
>> You'll get the play by play action. :-)
>
> Thankewverymuch ;-)
>

Could we trouble him for a webinar, or at least a youtube video?

On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 07:29:55 -1000, dsi1
> wrote:

> On 8/11/2014 5:50 AM, Mayo wrote:
> >
> > The resistance will be strong - I avoid adaptive cruise control because
> > it feels wrong top let the slower car on the freeway set my speed.
>
> Resistance is futile. Who the heck wanted air bags and front wheel
> drive? Nobody.

Air bags are fine with me. I'd rather have them than seatbelts.
Front wheel drive would be great too if seatbelts weren't the law
these days because there is no bump on the floor and a kid can sleep
sprawled out down there while the other one sleeps on the back seat.

The biggest thing I don't like about front wheel drive is the huge
turning radius. Other than that, I have no complaints.


--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On 8/11/2014 11:50 AM, Mayo wrote:

> I avoid adaptive cruise control because
> it feels wrong top let the slower car on the freeway set my speed.

Sometimes you have no choice. Move to the left lane, but if the left
lane is not open, you have to slow anyway. So why not let the CC do it
for you?

On 8/11/2014 12:06 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 8/11/2014 11:50 AM, Mayo wrote:
>
>> I avoid adaptive cruise control because
>> it feels wrong top let the slower car on the freeway set my speed.
>
> Sometimes you have no choice. Move to the left lane, but if the left
> lane is not open, you have to slow anyway. So why not let the CC do it
> for you?

It just feels like the slowest car in the lane sets the speed for all.

I'm not a speeder, but neither am I a dawdler.

Adaptive cruise limits choice.

But as in the driverless vehicle discussion, in areas where congestion
is king it may well be a stress lowering technology, not a bad thing at all.

On Monday, August 11, 2014 7:34:35 AM UTC-10, Mayo wrote:
> On 8/11/2014 11:29 AM, dsi1 wrote:
>
> > On 8/11/2014 5:50 AM, Mayo wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> The resistance will be strong - I avoid adaptive cruise control because
>
> >> it feels wrong top let the slower car on the freeway set my speed.
>
> >
>
> > Resistance is futile. Who the heck wanted air bags and front wheel
>
> > drive? Nobody.
>
>
>
> Point taken.
>
>
>
> In fact it may be that urban congestion is the fulcrum this balances
>
> upon, and we know that's not getting any better.

My guess is that self-driving cars will solve the problems with congestion by coordinating traffic flow. How much would the capacity of our roads be increased if we all knew what every other driver was doing and we didn't have to rely on human reflexes? My guess is two times. The cars will also be electric. In twenty years, automotive technology will have changed as much as our personal communications have.

On Sunday, August 10, 2014 7:08:44 PM UTC-10, Mayo wrote:
> On 8/10/2014 11:03 PM, sf wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 14:58:30 -1000, dsi1
>
> > > wrote:
>
> >
>
> >> On 8/10/2014 1:20 PM, Mayo wrote:
>
> >>> Dang, that's a Cheech and Chong flic in the making!
>
> >>>
>
> >>> I'd sure buy the tickets and popcorn.
>
> >>
>
> >> I'm hoping for a big to-do and lots of action. The woman upstairs is a
>
> >> pretty, attractive, gal or at least, was more so ten years ago. All the
>
> >> married women, including my wife, in this condo do not like her. All the
>
> >> married men, including me, think she's ok. Near as I can figure, the
>
> >> women don't like her on general principle because of her looks. You'd
>
> >> think she was beating her kids or cooking up meth in her kitchen. I used
>
> >> to think she might be a hooker but I come to find out she manages an
>
> >> office so that ain't it. :-)
>
> >
>
> > Oh, come on! Women (especially those in a secure marriage) don't
>
> > dislike other women based only on how they look. You need to dig a
>
> > little deeper.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> Could this be a den of insecure mariages?
>
>
>
> I mean, it happens.

Our marriage is definitly an insecure one and I don't give it very good odds of lasting much longer. My guess is that any day now, one of us could just drop dead. I would make me very happy if it were me rather than my wife.

As far as that woman goes, it saddens me to think that we live in a society where a gal will earn the scorn of her neighbors simply because she chooses to dress like a hooker. What a world!

On Monday, August 11, 2014 7:55:14 AM UTC-10, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 07:29:55 -1000, dsi1
>
> > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 8/11/2014 5:50 AM, Mayo wrote:
>
> > >
>
> > > The resistance will be strong - I avoid adaptive cruise control because
>
> > > it feels wrong top let the slower car on the freeway set my speed.
>
> >
>
> > Resistance is futile. Who the heck wanted air bags and front wheel
>
> > drive? Nobody.
>
>
>
> Air bags are fine with me. I'd rather have them than seatbelts.
>
> Front wheel drive would be great too if seatbelts weren't the law
>
> these days because there is no bump on the floor and a kid can sleep
>
> sprawled out down there while the other one sleeps on the back seat.
>
>
>
> The biggest thing I don't like about front wheel drive is the huge
>
> turning radius. Other than that, I have no complaints.
>
>

My assumption is that car design will change to firstly accomidate passengers since you don't need an engine up front nor would you need the safety of a crumple zone in front because we won't be hitting things in front of us. My guess is that the car of the future will be a one box design i.e., it's gonna look like a bus.

>
>
>
> --
>
> Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On 8/11/2014 1:43 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> On Monday, August 11, 2014 7:55:14 AM UTC-10, sf wrote:
>> On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 07:29:55 -1000, dsi1
>>
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 8/11/2014 5:50 AM, Mayo wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> The resistance will be strong - I avoid adaptive cruise control because
>>
>>>> it feels wrong top let the slower car on the freeway set my speed.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Resistance is futile. Who the heck wanted air bags and front wheel
>>
>>> drive? Nobody.
>>
>>
>>
>> Air bags are fine with me. I'd rather have them than seatbelts.
>>
>> Front wheel drive would be great too if seatbelts weren't the law
>>
>> these days because there is no bump on the floor and a kid can sleep
>>
>> sprawled out down there while the other one sleeps on the back seat.
>>
>>
>>
>> The biggest thing I don't like about front wheel drive is the huge
>>
>> turning radius. Other than that, I have no complaints.
>>
>>
>
> My assumption is that car design will change to firstly accomidate passengers since you don't need an engine up front nor would you need the safety of a crumple zone in front because we won't be hitting things in front of us. My guess is that the car of the future will be a one box design i.e., it's gonna look like a bus.

Do you recall the driverless cars in the film "Minority Report"?

http://www.seriouswheels.com/cars/to...ity-Report.htm

Pretty swoopy looking just to drive slow.

I'm stuck remembering the ARCO themed Autorama ride at Disneyland when I
was younger. The cars had obnoxiously loud and fume-producing 4 stroke
lawnmower engines and traveled in a concrete guide track so that if you
messed steering there was no way to of off the track.

Not near as much fun as electric bumper cars!

Or the very cool monorail over the park.

On Monday, August 11, 2014 9:55:30 AM UTC-10, Mayo wrote:
> On 8/11/2014 1:43 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>
> > On Monday, August 11, 2014 7:55:14 AM UTC-10, sf wrote:
>
> >> On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 07:29:55 -1000, dsi1
>
> >>
>
> >> > wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>> On 8/11/2014 5:50 AM, Mayo wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>> The resistance will be strong - I avoid adaptive cruise control because
>
> >>
>
> >>>> it feels wrong top let the slower car on the freeway set my speed.
>
> >>
>
> >>>
>
> >>
>
> >>> Resistance is futile. Who the heck wanted air bags and front wheel
>
> >>
>
> >>> drive? Nobody.
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> Air bags are fine with me. I'd rather have them than seatbelts.
>
> >>
>
> >> Front wheel drive would be great too if seatbelts weren't the law
>
> >>
>
> >> these days because there is no bump on the floor and a kid can sleep
>
> >>
>
> >> sprawled out down there while the other one sleeps on the back seat.
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> The biggest thing I don't like about front wheel drive is the huge
>
> >>
>
> >> turning radius. Other than that, I have no complaints.
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> > My assumption is that car design will change to firstly accomidate passengers since you don't need an engine up front nor would you need the safety of a crumple zone in front because we won't be hitting things in front of us. My guess is that the car of the future will be a one box design i.e., it's gonna look like a bus.
>
>
>
> Do you recall the driverless cars in the film "Minority Report"?
>
>
>
> http://www.seriouswheels.com/cars/to...ity-Report.htm
>
>
>
> Pretty swoopy looking just to drive slow.
>
>
>
> I'm stuck remembering the ARCO themed Autorama ride at Disneyland when I
>
> was younger. The cars had obnoxiously loud and fume-producing 4 stroke
>
> lawnmower engines and traveled in a concrete guide track so that if you
>
> messed steering there was no way to of off the track.
>
>
>
> Not near as much fun as electric bumper cars!
>
>
>
> Or the very cool monorail over the park.

I'd rather have jet packs or flying cars. My guess is that all cars will pretty much be the same mechanically and you'll buy it like cell phones. Maybe you get your choice of upholstery or paint job. It's gonna mean the end of car culture as we know it. That's the brakes.

On 8/11/2014 3:13 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> On Monday, August 11, 2014 9:55:30 AM UTC-10, Mayo wrote:
>> On 8/11/2014 1:43 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>>
>>> On Monday, August 11, 2014 7:55:14 AM UTC-10, sf wrote:
>>
>>>> On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 07:29:55 -1000, dsi1
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> > wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>> On 8/11/2014 5:50 AM, Mayo wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>>> The resistance will be strong - I avoid adaptive cruise control because
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>>> it feels wrong top let the slower car on the freeway set my speed.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>> Resistance is futile. Who the heck wanted air bags and front wheel
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>> drive? Nobody.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> Air bags are fine with me. I'd rather have them than seatbelts.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> Front wheel drive would be great too if seatbelts weren't the law
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> these days because there is no bump on the floor and a kid can sleep
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> sprawled out down there while the other one sleeps on the back seat.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> The biggest thing I don't like about front wheel drive is the huge
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> turning radius. Other than that, I have no complaints.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> My assumption is that car design will change to firstly accomidate passengers since you don't need an engine up front nor would you need the safety of a crumple zone in front because we won't be hitting things in front of us. My guess is that the car of the future will be a one box design i.e., it's gonna look like a bus.
>>
>>
>>
>> Do you recall the driverless cars in the film "Minority Report"?
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.seriouswheels.com/cars/to...ity-Report.htm
>>
>>
>>
>> Pretty swoopy looking just to drive slow.
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm stuck remembering the ARCO themed Autorama ride at Disneyland when I
>>
>> was younger. The cars had obnoxiously loud and fume-producing 4 stroke
>>
>> lawnmower engines and traveled in a concrete guide track so that if you
>>
>> messed steering there was no way to of off the track.
>>
>>
>>
>> Not near as much fun as electric bumper cars!
>>
>>
>>
>> Or the very cool monorail over the park.
>
> I'd rather have jet packs or flying cars. My guess is that all cars will pretty much be the same mechanically and you'll buy it like cell phones. Maybe you get your choice of upholstery or paint job. It's gonna mean the end of car culture as we know it. That's the brakes.
>
Lol, good pun!

On 8/11/2014 11:33 AM, Mayo wrote:
> On 8/11/2014 3:13 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>>
>> I'd rather have jet packs or flying cars. My guess is that all cars
>> will pretty much be the same mechanically and you'll buy it like cell
>> phones. Maybe you get your choice of upholstery or paint job. It's
>> gonna mean the end of car culture as we know it. That's the brakes.
>>
> Lol, good pun!

Thank you, I've used it many times in the past. I'm just grateful that
some people can still get a little enjoyment out of it.

On 8/11/2014 7:44 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> On 8/11/2014 11:33 AM, Mayo wrote:
>> On 8/11/2014 3:13 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>>>
>>> I'd rather have jet packs or flying cars. My guess is that all cars
>>> will pretty much be the same mechanically and you'll buy it like cell
>>> phones. Maybe you get your choice of upholstery or paint job. It's
>>> gonna mean the end of car culture as we know it. That's the brakes.
>>>
>> Lol, good pun!
>
> Thank you, I've used it many times in the past. I'm just grateful that
> some people can still get a little enjoyment out of it.

I think I missed it the other times...

On 8/11/2014 6:08 PM, Mayo wrote:
> On 8/11/2014 7:44 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>> On 8/11/2014 11:33 AM, Mayo wrote:
>>> On 8/11/2014 3:13 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I'd rather have jet packs or flying cars. My guess is that all cars
>>>> will pretty much be the same mechanically and you'll buy it like cell
>>>> phones. Maybe you get your choice of upholstery or paint job. It's
>>>> gonna mean the end of car culture as we know it. That's the brakes.
>>>>
>>> Lol, good pun!
>>
>> Thank you, I've used it many times in the past. I'm just grateful that
>> some people can still get a little enjoyment out of it.
>
> I think I missed it the other times...

Thanks to folks like you, jokes/puns can be recycled instead of just
being dumped or lying neglected in in some cheap paperback like "The
World Corniest Jokes." That book sucks. Thank you for your support!

On 8/11/2014 10:25 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> On 8/11/2014 6:08 PM, Mayo wrote:
>> On 8/11/2014 7:44 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>>> On 8/11/2014 11:33 AM, Mayo wrote:
>>>> On 8/11/2014 3:13 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd rather have jet packs or flying cars. My guess is that all cars
>>>>> will pretty much be the same mechanically and you'll buy it like cell
>>>>> phones. Maybe you get your choice of upholstery or paint job. It's
>>>>> gonna mean the end of car culture as we know it. That's the brakes.
>>>>>
>>>> Lol, good pun!
>>>
>>> Thank you, I've used it many times in the past. I'm just grateful that
>>> some people can still get a little enjoyment out of it.
>>
>> I think I missed it the other times...
>
> Thanks to folks like you, jokes/puns can be recycled instead of just
> being dumped or lying neglected in in some cheap paperback like "The
> World Corniest Jokes." That book sucks. Thank you for your support!

LOL!

I'm big on recycling. I just never knew it went to puns.

I'll continue to pay less attention so you can work through your inventory.

Well I guess that trashes this thread ;-)

On 8/11/2014 6:32 PM, Mayo wrote:
>
> Well I guess that trashes this thread ;-)

I myself, am hopeful. :-)

On 8/10/2014 12:33 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 11:54:19 -0400, jmcquown >
> wrote:
>
>> It's also probably against fire code.
>
> I think it has always been against code, but not as well enforced.
> Also, other residents of the building want to keep their windows open
> and not smell the smoke - especially when pyromaniacs like that kid
> have a hand in getting the bbq started.
>
>
When his father got home and I told him about it he said something like
so, we're supposed to wheel the grill down the sidewalk [away from the
building]? Uh... YEAH. And how about don't let your kids play with
lighter fluid?

Jill

On Monday, August 11, 2014 10:29:55 AM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:

>
> Resistance is futile. Who the heck wanted air bags and front wheel
> drive? Nobody.

I wanted front wheel drive when I was driving through snow five months
a year. And airbags don't bruise you as much as that shoulder harness does.

On 8/13/2014 2:46 PM, wrote:
> On Monday, August 11, 2014 10:29:55 AM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
>
>>
>> Resistance is futile. Who the heck wanted air bags and front wheel
>> drive? Nobody.
>
> I wanted front wheel drive when I was driving through snow five months
> a year. And airbags don't bruise you as much as that shoulder harness does.
>
Well, I wasn't talking about you - you're like the only person that
thought FWD was wonderful. Everyone else was bitching about it. Ain't
you supposed to be wearing your seatbelts with airbags?

On Wednesday, August 13, 2014 7:01:19 PM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
> On 8/13/2014 2:46 PM, wrote:
>
> > On Monday, August 11, 2014 10:29:55 AM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
>

> >> Resistance is futile. Who the heck wanted air bags and front wheel
> >> drive? Nobody.
>
> > I wanted front wheel drive when I was driving through snow five months
> > a year. And airbags don't bruise you as much as that shoulder harness does.
>
> Well, I wasn't talking about you - you're like the only person that
> thought FWD was wonderful. Everyone else was bitching about it. Ain't
> you supposed to be wearing your seatbelts with airbags?

Weight over the driving wheels is the main thing. VW Bugs were pretty good
in the snow, too.

When you're in a wreck, if there is no airbag your body propels you till
the seat belt stops you, leaving a bruise.

On 8/13/14, 11:13 PM, wrote:

> Weight over the driving wheels is the main thing. VW Bugs were pretty good
> in the snow, too.


.... as were my three Corvairs. 8

-- Larry

On 8/13/2014 9:20 PM, pltrgyst wrote:
> On 8/13/14, 11:13 PM, wrote:
>
>> Weight over the driving wheels is the main thing. VW Bugs were pretty
>> good
>> in the snow, too.
>
>
> ... as were my three Corvairs. 8
>
> -- Larry
>
>
Those late model Corsa's were really nice!

> wrote in message
...
> On Monday, August 11, 2014 10:29:55 AM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
>
>>
>> Resistance is futile. Who the heck wanted air bags and front wheel
>> drive? Nobody.
>
> I wanted front wheel drive when I was driving through snow five months
> a year. And airbags don't bruise you as much as that shoulder harness
> does.

I've had a 4x4 for years now and I wouldn't want any other.

--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

On 8/13/2014 5:13 PM, wrote:
>
> Weight over the driving wheels is the main thing. VW Bugs were pretty good
> in the snow, too.
>
> When you're in a wreck, if there is no airbag your body propels you till
> the seat belt stops you, leaving a bruise.
>
Thanks for the clarification. I never heard of airbags being advocated
for cosmetic reasons so that was a little confusing.

On 8/14/2014 4:05 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>
>
> > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Monday, August 11, 2014 10:29:55 AM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Resistance is futile. Who the heck wanted air bags and front wheel
>>> drive? Nobody.
>>
>> I wanted front wheel drive when I was driving through snow five months
>> a year. And airbags don't bruise you as much as that shoulder harness
>> does.
>
> I've had a 4x4 for years now and I wouldn't want any other.
>
Given some of the winter weather the UK has had the past couple of
years, I can see why.