>If you disagree, then make an argument. Don't pester people with questions. The questions are the argument. They are the problems in your position that you ha

>If you disagree, then make an argument. Don't pester people with questions. The questions are the argument. They are the problems in your position that you have not answered that would be required for them to work. I don't need to offer up another alternatively entirely to make the cogent point that your assertion fails. This is just common sense. I have no idea why this needs to be explained to you. >Isolated demand for rigor. You asserted without evidence that obscuring plates cause accidents, yet demand evidence when I make the common knowledge observation that texting while driving leads to accidents. Well you dismissed my point just as readily... it's obnoxious, isn't it? > Look, this is an internet forum, not an academic journal Weird point from the guy demanding a sort of rigor about this whole situation that is so beyond the application of common sense I'm left a little bit confused as to what point you'd ever think you were making that wasn't merely academic.