foofy
Get a scraper/brush and keep it in your car.
Use it before you start driving. Don’t just clear a “porthole” to see out of. Clear the snow off the roof too. If you don’t it’ll fly off and hit the guy behind you or it’ll slide down over your windshield.
If you don’t have your scraper, a credit card will work in a pinch for the windshield.
Don’t pour hot water over your windshield to melt ice. At best it just doesn’t work, at worst you’ll crack the windshield
If you’re new to driving on icy/snowy roads, get a sense for how/when your car will break traction. Find an empty parking lot, accelerate a bit and then brake increasingly harder until you start to slide. This will give you a feel for the conditions under which you’ll lose traction to brake. This is also a good way to learn how to recover from a slide.
Is the criticism that they told drivers about how the Idaho stop worked? If the Idaho stop was going to be more widely adopted, it’s a reasonable assumption that there would be a public education campaign so people knew what to expect.
Either way though, it’s a study meant to test a hypothesis and the outcome suggested that Idaho’s approach may be a good one.
If you’re wanting an admission that the study’s results may not hold up under further testing, sure. Admitted. But the study as a first step is pretty reasonable.
Kirkland anything (nearly anyway)
You know, I don’t disagree with your ultimate point. But if you look through this comment chain you should recognize that the way you chose to make it is:
- Needlessly antagonistic, and (therefore)
- Not very effective
If you wanted to convince anyone or provoke interesting discussion I think you failed.
In the future, you should just make your argument/statement instead of asking “clever” bad faith questions.