First off, not all cars can be equipped with a remote start. Manuals typically can’t find an installer because of the clutch killswitch for the starter motor.

That’s so bogus, just like cops and EMTs claiming they only use their cell phones for emergency use. Cops leave their cars idling 90% of the places they go, for work or not, and my local PD typically has 3-4 squad cars idling outside it at any time with nobody outside.

I don’t know, I like the Rocket Bunny kit, albeit without the stupid drift-bitch wannabe bumper delete. Almost as bad as zip tying on a perfectly new body panel so you look like you dorifto.

This is one of the first times I’ve crack piped a car I legitimately like, but for $25,000 you can build almost the same car yourself AND know the providence of 100% of the build, and if you go more conventionally with an LS or RB swap, you’ll spend less money and be in really familiar territory. For $25,000 crack…

But that guy isn’t worth a multimillion dollar settlement just to avoid publicity.

No, he still has a point. The collision was caused by negligent driving, not negligent product design. Acquiring a patent does not in any way obligate a company to produce the technology, and there is absolutely nothing stated or implied that suggests such a technology was present in the phone.

Indeed it is. Curse these interrelated articles!

That’s a terrible analogy, because prior to mandatory seatbelts and airbags driver safety was appalling. That isn’t even remotely true for commercial air travel, which has been incredibly safe for decades, and the TSA hasn’t made any appreciable improvement.

Actually, that any further information will be kept private, per the manager, is absolutely the main subject of the article. It’s even the headline. If you missed that your reading comprehension is a bit rusty.

No problem Captain Self-Absorbed Jackass Fishing for Details to Invade Schumis Privacy.

And it isn’t going to be, because the family feels it would violate Schumachers privacy. Which was in the article. In fact it’s the entire point of the article.

The part where it says his health isn’t a public issue, which quite clearly communicates that his health (I.e. His progress towards cognitive functions like communication) will not be discussed or revealed to the public (I.e. You).

Way to not bother reading the article.

They can’t keep him from contesting the results of the election HE WON without a shred of evidence on Twitter, do you really think they’re going to be able to stop a phone call?

There’s no money to be made there, so it’s not a concern.

I don’t know if it’s wrong, but it’s small and petty if you’re serious.

First off, if 5-10 miles per hour makes the difference between stopping and not stopping in time for an unexpected hazard, your car was not safe to drive on the road or you are wildly misjudging conditions.

You aren’t defending the speech, you’re defending the right to voice. It’s morally bankrupt to believe that any person or persons hold the right to define the thoughts and views of others based on their own subjective moral compass. Disagree, fight the speech, and use your own voice to sway those who’s ideas repulse…

The immense cultural pressure exerted by traditional and social media is absolutely a form of censorship. It’s true that you can say most things without having charges pressed against you, but there is absolutely a culture of censorship where if you say something that might possibly be considered offensive there will…

There’s a people for that? Have I ever driven quickly through an empty parking area with no obstructions? Yes. Do I drive like that when there are cars parked or any objects that might obscure a pedestrian walking? No. Not quite sure where you were going with your overbroad generalization, but there’s my parking lot…