Well, deal with it. I wasn't cheering for Canada either way. Nothing worse than arrogant Canadian fans. They'd be lucky to finish 4th. Quote me on that. They have a bad team and that is why I won't be cheering for them.
The first study of this chapter noted a gender difference in that female drivers appeared to be more distracted when conversing on a mobile phone than did the male drivers; and that the male drivers appeared to be more distracted when conversing with a passenger. The second study examined the question of why a gender difference might exist for mobile phone conversations and varied the content of the conversation so that it was either cognitive or emotive in nature. This manipulation not only confirmed the previous finding that female drivers make more errors than do male drivers but also found that the pattern of responses, in terms of type of errors made, differed for male and female drivers. Overall, both males and females made more errors when the conversation was emotive rather than cognitive in content, especially so for the female drivers. Female drivers were particularly prone to making lateral or lane position errors and there was a tendency for the male drivers to make more errors of a longitudinal or temporal type. These studies are aimed at gaining a better understanding of the apparent gender specificity of some sources of distraction for young drivers, with a view to better targeting safety messages to this at-risk group of drivers.
http://road.cc/content/news/34776-ma...on-says-survey A survey has found that male drivers are more than twice as likely than female ones to suffer an accident because they have been distracted at the wheel. The news comes in the wake of a landmark ruling earlier this year by the European Court of Justice, due to be implemented in the UK by the end of next year, that will make it illegal for insurance companies to differentiate between customers due to gender.
If I am reading that right, the next time my wife wants to have a conversation while I am driving I should call a friend instead. Purely in the name of safety of course.
Stupid hoodies that continue an over the top geek culture. It's cool you like the Ninja Turles and Boba Fett but you look plain dumb sporting a hoodie of a turtle shell.
I try to stay out of the abortion issue altogether. Mostly I think that it has just become a smokescreen for political parties and contestants who are in trouble dealing with current issues on the political horizon.
Have to comment on the dimwit who is the leader of the Social Credit party of Alberta, Len Skowronski, who wrote into the Calgary Herald 'letters' column today.
"***** is complaining that a postcard delivered to his house upset his young son because it displayed a bloody aborted fetus. While consoling his son, he should have taken advantage of this teaching moment. He could have explained the purpose of the postcard and the awful picture in a dialogue, including the following: 'This is a baby who wasn't wanted by its mommy so she chose to have the baby pulled from her tummy and killed. The person who delivered this to our house wanted to remind me that this was happening. I am angry and will work to stop the killing of babies. I will choose people to be in our government who will make this against the law. I hope that before you grow up, mommies will stop killing their babies in Canada.'" - Len Skowronski, leader of SCP of Alberta.
There is so much wrong, on so many levels with this comment, and the mentality that would recognize that this is an appropriate response. Instead of going into a long rant about them, I'll just put out there that showing pictures of mayhem and gore to very small children and then using needling and cartoonish language to indoctrinate them is probably not an adult way of raising a child.
And exposing children to these images is wrong. (I don't even appreciate the use of shock value in any political advertisement, and I'm considerably taller.)
The writer of this quote is running for public office. And I don't think anyone who has opinions such as this one should be allowed near small children. Can you imagine him leaning down and giving that speech to a five year old while waving around a picture of an aborted fetus?
If he wanted to take someone who didn't really have an opinion on this issue, and make them identify as pro-choice, then it's brilliant.
Does anyone else drive a black vehicle and have issues with birds taking dumps all over them all the time? It seems no matter where I park, at least once a week I find bird crap on my car. Even when I'm not parked under a tree, it still happens. It's almost like the bird knows it has white #### and decides that black is the biggest contrast to white so he purposely aims for the black.
This morning I got to my car to drive to work and of course bird #### is on it. I looked at all my neighbors cars and nothing on theirs. This happens all the time, and it's driving me nuts. Birds RGMG.
Location: In a land without pants, or war, or want. But mostly we care about the pants.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyrocket03
Dude, the anti-abortion banners on Deerfoot must be stopped. Its pathetic, disgusting and no one wants to see it. I'm all for this petition if it stops the anti abortion crowd and im not going to be terribly upset if we lose some other advertising along the way. These people can protest without the graphic, disturbing images on their gigantic banners. I do not need that shoved down my throat on my commute.
Nobody has the right to "not be offended". Censorship is far more dangerous than a few nutbars pushing past the boundaries of civil public discourse.
That's another thing that GMG, people being "offended" and expecting that "something must be done". No, almost always *nothing* should be done, and especially not without carefully considering the consequences of any action.
__________________
Better educated sadness than oblivious joy.
The Following User Says Thank You to jammies For This Useful Post:
Location: In a land without pants, or war, or want. But mostly we care about the pants.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huntingwhale
Does anyone else drive a black vehicle and have issues with birds taking dumps all over them all the time? It seems no matter where I park, at least once a week I find bird crap on my car. Even when I'm not parked under a tree, it still happens. It's almost like the bird knows it has white #### and decides that black is the biggest contrast to white so he purposely aims for the black.
This morning I got to my car to drive to work and of course bird #### is on it. I looked at all my neighbors cars and nothing on theirs. This happens all the time, and it's driving me nuts. Birds RGMG.
Maybe the birds have been hired by your enemies, and this is the first step in a campaign to make your life unbearable.
Watch the skies, Huntingwhale. Watch the skies!
__________________
Better educated sadness than oblivious joy.
I try to stay out of the abortion issue altogether. Mostly I think that it has just become a smokescreen for political parties and contestants who are in trouble dealing with current issues on the political horizon.
Have to comment on the dimwit who is the leader of the Social Credit party of Alberta, Len Skowronski, who wrote into the Calgary Herald 'letters' column today.
"***** is complaining that a postcard delivered to his house upset his young son because it displayed a bloody aborted fetus. While consoling his son, he should have taken advantage of this teaching moment. He could have explained the purpose of the postcard and the awful picture in a dialogue, including the following: 'This is a baby who wasn't wanted by its mommy so she chose to have the baby pulled from her tummy and killed. The person who delivered this to our house wanted to remind me that this was happening. I am angry and will work to stop the killing of babies. I will choose people to be in our government who will make this against the law. I hope that before you grow up, mommies will stop killing their babies in Canada.'" - Len Skowronski, leader of SCP of Alberta.
There is so much wrong, on so many levels with this comment, and the mentality that would recognize that this is an appropriate response. Instead of going into a long rant about them, I'll just put out there that showing pictures of mayhem and gore to very small children and then using needling and cartoonish language to indoctrinate them is probably not an adult way of raising a child.
And exposing children to these images is wrong. (I don't even appreciate the use of shock value in any political advertisement, and I'm considerably taller.)
The writer of this quote is running for public office. And I don't think anyone who has opinions such as this one should be allowed near small children. Can you imagine him leaning down and giving that speech to a five year old while waving around a picture of an aborted fetus?
If he wanted to take someone who didn't really have an opinion on this issue, and make them identify as pro-choice, then it's brilliant.
While I am pro-choice I am with the dimwit, as I stated earlier in thread. Use it as a teaching moment. What you want to teach your kid is up to you. It could be that you need to be vigilent against senationized advertising designed to rile people up, It could be that the rights of individuals need to be protected, it doesn't have to be even about abortion.
The alternative is taking away someones rights to free speech. And unless its inciting hate which I don't think this crosses the line I am for it.
On a general note why are people so disgusted by the imagery? It is an accurate representation of what is happening. To me this is along the lines of people who don't want to know what the conditions are like in a feed lot or a meat packing plant. If you aren't comfortable with the consequences of the choices we make maybe people should revisit their stance on the issue. If you aren't comfortable knowing how a cow gets shot in the back of the head with a bolt gun maybe you shouldn't be eating meat.
Too much of the impacts we create as a society are hidden from us because it is disturbing.
I don't think that's the point though. Eating meat and seeing this on a large banner ad that anybody can see are two completely different things.
It's not about the message I don't believe...it's about the method of delivery.
People would have the same complaints if PETA had a bunch of slaughtered cows on a billboard or clubbed baby seals. People don't want to be confronted with the impact of their choices.
People would have the same complaints if PETA had a bunch of slaughtered cows on a billboard or clubbed baby seals. People don't want to be confronted with the impact of their choices.
But just maybe, it's the people who are confronted with this that don't make those choices? How do you decipher who sees it and who doesn't and who is culpable?
But just maybe, it's the people who are confronted with this that don't make those choices? How do you decipher who sees it and who doesn't and who is culpable?
Similarly, how would the government manage or decide if messages are being conveyed in a way which is "graphic or disturbing"? Who sets the standards?
Censorship is not the answer and turning over more power to the Government should never be a consideration.
While I am pro-choice I am with the dimwit, as I stated earlier in thread. Use it as a teaching moment. What you want to teach your kid is up to you. It could be that you need to be vigilent against senationized advertising designed to rile people up, It could be that the rights of individuals need to be protected, it doesn't have to be even about abortion.
The alternative is taking away someones rights to free speech. And unless its inciting hate which I don't think this crosses the line I am for it.
On a general note why are people so disgusted by the imagery? It is an accurate representation of what is happening. To me this is along the lines of people who don't want to know what the conditions are like in a feed lot or a meat packing plant. If you aren't comfortable with the consequences of the choices we make maybe people should revisit their stance on the issue. If you aren't comfortable knowing how a cow gets shot in the back of the head with a bolt gun maybe you shouldn't be eating meat.
Too much of the impacts we create as a society are hidden from us because it is disturbing.
I can't imagine a situation where if someone stood at a kindergarten handing out abortion pamphlets, police wouldn't be called, or faces wouldn't be punched. There may not be a law prohibiting such behavior, but there is a moral standard that we adhere to.
If I created a massive billboard showing grisly depictions of a severed arm to promote chainsaw safety, or a child's severed head to expose the effect of war crimes, I would think that I've crossed a line over what is ethically viable in our culture. Especially if I show them to children. They are accurate representations, but not to be forced upon everyone, that takes away their own choice to engage.
It's more about understanding what is an appropriate venue. This isn't about free speech. These people can talk all they want, and anyone can choose to listen. By showing these pictures to what is usually a captive or unsuspecting audience, it's forcing a visual assault upon others.
By all means, talk, create dialogue, hold rallies, hand out pamphlets to people who choose to take them. But don't take away someones ability to shelter their own children from these visual depictions. We even have NSFW tags on this very site!
This really isn't a free speech issue.
Anyway, this is taking up too much of this thread, so this will be my last post here on this, although I will listen if there is a reply. Just my thoughts.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Harry Lime For This Useful Post:
Sorry if fata but it GMG when people put their heads over that glass partition at places like Extreme Pita and Subway. It never fails to amaze me that people are so blithely unaware of the purpose of a barrier between their spit and everyone else's food. The knob in line today had his hands on the top of the glass and was pointing down to the ingredients as though the hired help didn't know what green pepper was and needed to be shown. Clueless.
__________________
'Bieber definitely merits $1M per show' - sun
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Free Ben Hur! For This Useful Post:
Wrgmg is people saying this is just the 'new normal' in regards to flooding in the spring with no statistical basis or even understanding to back it up. So far this year has been just like other previous years, small amounts of flooding in localized areas.
The Following User Says Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
Nobody has the right to "not be offended". Censorship is far more dangerous than a few nutbars pushing past the boundaries of civil public discourse.
That's another thing that GMG, people being "offended" and expecting that "something must be done". No, almost always *nothing* should be done, and especially not without carefully considering the consequences of any action.
So it would be OK to hand out pictures and hang banners of dead kids with bullet wounds to the head, in support of gun control?
whenever there is heavier rainfall
- Main entrance / exit from Royal Oak - Royal Birch Boulevard was flooding badly at 5am when wife was leaving for work - police officer was there at that time to warn people leaving community.
By time I drove to office close to 7:30 i saw some cars stuck, and I took other exit out via Country Hills.
Hopefully there will be relief by the late afternoon when folks begin to come home from work day.
Yet another reason why the lrt planning & stoney trail exits which closed a main exit / entrance to both communities off of Crowchild trail did not take things into consideration... & yes I'm aware of the excuses regarding how tramps etc needed to be built a certain way due to distances.
Just IMHO not a lot of foresight when closing roads to communities that had access for over 15 years - notwithstanding what was always on the plans once LRT & Stoney were going to be built.
Yep I'm also aware of other communities with even less exits which again is not very good planning IMO.
So it would be OK to hand out pictures and hang banners of dead kids with bullet wounds to the head, in support of gun control?
I would be okay with it.
I doubt it works though because that type of advertising only serves to galvanize people in their positions and push moderates further to one side or the other
