One-Third of Teens Aged 16, 17 Text While Driving: Study

JRobert wrote:

Probably all liberals. I just hope they don't take out any conservatives when they kill themselves.

John C wrote:

<quoted text>I knew the only comment would be left by an angry conservative. You losers just cant control hat conservative hatred. Arent there enough threads for you to act stupid on?

The laughing liberal wrote:

more diarrhea from iria. People of all ages are texting while driving.

John C wrote:

<quoted text>I knew the only comment would be left by an angry conservative. You losers just cant control hat conservative hatred. Arent there enough threads for you to act stupid on?

JRobert wrote:

Probably all liberals. I just hope they don't take out any conservatives when they kill themselves.

JRobert wrote:

<quoted text>
What I do hate and what does make me angry (and I don't apologize for it) are the assholes who endanger me and those I love by talking on their cells and text while driving. And, sure, I since conservatives are members of my "family" I prefer that they don't take them out when they kill themselves.
You don't get it? It's no different than them driving drunk or playing with a loaded gun around those I love.

Barney Stinson wrote:

<quoted text>
i don't think many people are going to argue with you that people that text and drive are dangerous, or that you're out of line to be so angry about it.
however, your implecation of "probably all liberals", is just assinine.
1. most teenagers are liberals since they want more freedom and more free services, plus they have no money so they don't put money into the system.
2. conservative teenagers are probably just as likely to text while driving.
3. this had nothing to do with politics, and you made it about politics.
everyone has the right to be mad at or hate poeple that text while they drive. no need to blame obama for it or anything.

JRobert wrote:

<quoted text>
"however, your implecation (sic) of "probably all liberals", is just assinine (sic).
Barney, I usually ignore misspelling, but I do get a chuckle when posters misspell words within their attacks on the intelligence of others. When they do that, the irony is rich.
As for my making it political, you admit that most ARE probably liberal, so why not use a little hyperbole to shock complacent fools into a realization that we're not talking about some abstract concept but real people who daily use cells and text while driving, and real people who are daily injured and killed by those same fools.
Because it's not just the texters who endanger me and my extended family of conservatives, but those who use cell phones while driving. Doing so has been repeatedly proven to be akin to drunk driving.

Barney Stinson wrote:

<quoted text>
I wasn't insulting your intelligence, or insulting you at all.
you turned this story into a political fight.
someone called you out on it.
you got pissed off.
i explained why it all happened.
You stayed pissed.
Now I try to explain it to you again.
Next, I'm guessing you make another post about pissed off you are.
Texting while driving is dumb. It happens with people of all ages. They are all dumb. Blaming it on Obama is also dumb.

JRobert wrote:

<quoted text>
If you think you weren't trying to "insult my intelligence", then you should stop using words you don't understand. What on earth do you think it means when you say something someone says is assinine (sic)?
Your calling texting (or using a cell) when driving is "dumb", is like saying driving without a seatbelt is dumb. I can almost see you shrugging your shoulder at such a minor thing. But it's far, far more than "dumb"; it's as dangerous to other drivers as drink driving, road rage, or playing with a loaded gun. People who text or use a cell when driving should lose the privilege of driving. Zero tolerance.
Speaking of dumb, you really don't have much upstairs, do you? No one "called me out." Another poster missed my point, just as you obviously have.
Clearly, Obama has nothing to do with this, but your comment suggesting that I blame it on him shows that you're one of those robotic types who hears what he wants to hear, regardless of what is said.

Barney Stinson wrote:

<quoted text>
You can say stupid things without being an idiot. Look at umm, i don't know, President Bush? You can probably say that a number of things he said were asinine, and if he said them in such a way to be demeaning to liberals, you might call them assinine, since he is also being an ass.
When you say things like "Probably all liberals", you're making foolish assumptions. I'm not saying you're a fool, you're just acting like one.

Tooth4U wrote:

Texting has become an addiction for youths.
I attempted to provide a solution so no more are killed.
I hope someone runs with the idea, and makes it optional and affordable.

JRobert wrote:

<quoted text>
The better solution is loss of license, zero tolerance, for cell use or texting when driving. Once the word gets out through rigorous enforcement, it would pretty much stop. No fancy technology needed. The kids would easily circumvent it, anyway.
Someone just told me that in Sweden it's illegal to drive when you have the flu. I don't know if that's true or how it would be enforced, but I understand the concept.

Tooth4U wrote:

<quoted text>
I disagree on ENFORCEMENT. As if any thing else we do needs the Force application? More roadside check points?
A EMP can generate up to 5 ft from the automobile. I would like to know how they can go around that~ for to interfere with it, shuts the car off (L)

JRobert wrote:

<quoted text>
Haha. Nice tap dancing. Using your rationalization I can say that your posts contain nothing but assinine (sic) logic leading to assinine (sic) conclusions, but I wouldn't be attacking your intelligence. But the truth is that when you make such pronouncements its reasonable to understand that you are attacking the intelligence of the subject.
And "probably all liberals" is such an outlandish statement that only those looking to be affronted wouldn't be able to see it for the deliberate hyperbole that it was...i.e. exaggeration for effect.