Quote:
Originally Posted by Buehler445
**** me, my Dad is 66, and he does the shit too. Most of the time it is on rural county roads, but still. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that he's 66 and feels compelled to compose longform multifaceted responses to simple questions behind the wheel.
That isn't really the issue. I don't go 150+. Fastest I've ever been in a car is 110.
The question is why should I be restricted from owning a car that is capable of going 150+. I also don't a car that has a heads up display, but does that mean I should be restricted from owning one?
And it is certainly possible that I could legally and in good faith use some of the performance functions that also allow 150+ to keep myself out of trouble. My current vehicle, while costing...let's just say all the money, isn't very evasive if I need it to be.
|
Not arguing, but the question is actually whether we should be allowed to own a car that can exceed 100 mph, not 150. Like it's a given that we shouldn't be able to buy a car that can go 150 already.