From: utzoo!decvax!harpo!npoiv!alice!rabbit!jj Newsgroups: net.auto Title: Re: Restrictive Headlight Laws Article-I.D.: rabbit.721 Posted: Fri Aug 20 15:49:42 1982 Received: Sat Aug 21 05:45:59 1982 References: mcnc.1287 This article on "Restrictive Headlight Laws" is one of the most blatant attempts at misdirection that I have ever had the opportunity to see. 1). The premise fails on a night with overcast sky's, for example. Are you responsible enough to stay off the roads them. 2) Are you willing to assume the responsibility if someone hits you while you are driving around in the dark? It IS your responsibitily to be seen as well as see. (Check it out, that's absolutely right.) Such a person might be turning on the road that you are driving down in absolute darkness and get hit, and quite justifiably argue that: "HE (I am presuming gender for linguistic reasons.) WAS ATTEMPTING TO BE INVISIBLE, AND HE SUCCEEDED, I HIT HIM. IT'S HIS FAULT" This is a clearcut case when the person without headlights forces the other person to make a mistake. (i.e. entrapment of a sort) While this arguement can be extended to extremes, and result in the current legal systemthe ability to entrap a person must be limited in some way. As one may notice, I have not even commented on the need for headlights. I will leave attacking absurdity to the rest of the net. Cherio rabbit!jj