4 ms·
Again, I want to see you explain why those "inconvenient interactions" will never add up to a safety problem, because all I'm seeing is handwaving. In my view,
by wpietri 3y ago
Again, I want to see you explain why those "inconvenient interactions" will never add up to a safety problem, because all I'm seeing is handwaving. In my view, "inconveniencing" a firefighter in the middle of fighting a fire is a clear safety issue Your notion that you have to see blood before taking it seriously is pretty wild to me. In college I knew a guy who regularly drove drunk using pretty similar logic because he'd never had a problem.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago“Never add up” is a straw man. If your guy in college drunk driving were hundreds driving drunk every day for years on end, yes, I’d validly (if sceptically) question my priors if there hadn’t been any injuries nor serious property damage. Here, my priors are much softer than those for drunk driving. So when all we have is anecdotes and vague interactions, I lean towards the lack of evidence of actual harm.