Furthermore, our arguments must be concise and commonsense. If the
government spills out a lot of legalese about DOT requirements, the reply
should be something like "Would you rather be in an Army HMMWV or a DOT
approved Suzuki?". Good sound bite material and then the government
spokesman is on the defensive.
This requires work and some of us are working on it. Anyone else
interested is invited to help.
thanks,
chuck
=================================
> Another vehicle for the cause could be the national news programs
>that highlight "your tax dollars at work", ABC NBC CBS are our friends.
This I strongly doubt. If you saw the old 60 Minutes skit on roll-over
M151's they didn't bother with facts at all, just made the roll-over case
sound the way they wanted it to, ending the CJ-5 series. Granted, they
have a great ability to create public image but how can you "control" it
and be sre they don't suck up the Fed's BS line that these are dangerous
vehicles?
The concept is good but lots of work must be done before. You'll need
good arguments and facts to counter the governments current excuses for
not allowing vehicles released; "rollover" danger, lack of DOT
approval... It can be done but all the homework should be prepared first.
Daryl
D&L Bensinger mitymite@juno.com
2442 Main St.
Narvon, PA 17555
phone and fax (610) 286-9545