Originally Posted by dwasifar
Incorrect? Not exactly. I'd characterize it more as "incomplete." You are correct that there is some assumption necessary unless I stop and poll every driver. But it is a REASONABLE ASSUMPTION that a significant proportion of bright lights are due to deliberate modification. Can you seriously be disputing this?
no, but that isn't what i said, is it?
Originally Posted by dwasifar
If I drop a rock over a cliff, and a few moments later I hear a rock hit the bottom, I ASSUME the sound came from my rock. I suppose it's POSSIBLE that there was someone with a catcher's mitt and a different rock halfway down the cliff who substituted rocks in midflight. But it's not likely enough to make it necessary to check every time.
Back to the lights now - there is a thriving market in bright bulbs and "rebased" or full-on HID conversions. And there are cars driving around with lights significantly brighter than stock. What's the more reasonable assumption - that all these cars have aiming problems
i don't know where you're getting this 'unreasonable' assumpsion, as i never said that "all of these cars", or even a slight majority are aiming problems. i merely suggested it as another possible factor.
Originally Posted by dwasifar
and the people buying those light kits are hanging them on their living room walls for decoration? Or that people are installing them in their cars and driving? If you say "we can't know" you're technically correct in a limited sort of way, but by those standards of universal doubt we can't know ANYTHING. You can't know, for example, that someone didn't sneak into your house while you were asleep, steal everything, and replace it all with exact replicas. You just assume it didn't happen.
well, that's more of an existential than a causal type of assumption, but sure, you're absolutely right. you should take some philosophy classes. that shit changes the way you think about things, even if it is the most boring subject on earth
Originally Posted by dwasifar
There's really no reason to take that attitude. All *I* asked in the original post was, why do people put really bright lights in their cars, and do they get hassled by the cops if they're overbright. Nowhere in that post did I say that ALL bright lights are too bright for me, and if you came away with that, well, who's making assumptions?
actually, nowhere in my post did i say, imply, or suggest anything like that, so who's making assumptions? not me!
Originally Posted by dwasifar
Some are, some aren't. The question of whether a given light is legal is for the cops to decide, and that's why I asked if people are hassled by the cops.
We're in agreement that some people put bright lights in their cars. We're in agreement that some of those are done poorly or inconsiderately and create a problem for other drivers. So I really don't see why you think it's necessary to flip me off.
oh no, i used the :fawk: smiley. oh crap! i just used it again... get a sense of humor
i never said anything about reasonable assumptions. in fact, i was never arguing that your assumptions were unreasonable - just that they were assumptions. you noticed that yes, we do happen to agree on most points. but see, i prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt, rather than assume they're doing something wrong intentionally right off the bat. i'd consider that maybe they're not just some punk ricer who doesn't give a shit about the other drivers on the road, because i know plenty of people look at me and my car (and my friends and their cars) and think the same thing. would you appreciate that kind of rush to judgement?