On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 23:01:09 -0500, "Mark A" <nobody[at]nowhere.com> wrote:

- quote -

Not in your vehicle, as long as it's concealed.

http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs...l/HB01815F.htm

- quote -

I said a few years. Few means not many. Six years is not many years, unless
you're a sixteen year old. Why the nitpicking?

- quote -

There are drive through liquor stores in Texas. Maybe not in every friggin town,
village, and city. Is it really necessary to rebut this?

- quote -

Maybe. I do believe I have the right to defend myself from the bad guys, and
that the laws should make it easier, not harder to do so.

- quote -

Yeah, it sure couldn't be any worse than Milwaukee, except for Chicago, where
they're not rude per se, just crazy.

- quote -

I know that what I posted is accurate. What makes me think you're from Texas?

Regardless, my point wasn't to judge Texas law, it was to provide perspective to
what I believe is a silly California law regarding temple widths, and that it's
usually folly to try to control peoples behavior to the nth degree.

Robert Martellaro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Optician/Owner
Roberts Optical
Wauwatosa Wi.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself."
- Richard Feynman

"Robert Martellaro" <robopt[at]nospam.com> wrote in message
news:duasp319d6r406751feo4ml202tc9v17i1[at]4ax.com...
- quote -

1. You need a license to carry a gun in Texas.

2. Regarding having a open bottle of alcohol in your car, it has been more
than 6 years that this has been illegal in Texas. Mississippi still allows
drivers to consume alcohol while driving (as long as the driver stays below
the 0.08% blood alcohol content limit for drunk driving), and seven states
(Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Mississippi, Missouri, Virginia, and West
Virginia) allow passengers to consume alcohol while the vehicle is in
motion. However, local laws in these states may limit open containers in
vehicles, as was the case is some localities in Texas prior to 2001.

3. The sale of liquor is controlled locally in Texas. More than 50 counties
are completely "dry". In some areas of major cities (such as Dallas) there
are no liquor stores allowed. Some localities in Texas even prohibit the
sale of beer and wine in grocery and convenience stores.

4. You may thing that Texas is the wild west, but I would bet you that there
are a lot less car jackings there, perhaps because criminals understand that
a driver "might" have a gun.

5. Drivers are more polite in Texas than in most states, especially compared
to northern states.

6. You don't know Jack about Texas.

On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 13:39:40 -0600, "Mike Tyner" <mtyner[at]mindspring.com> wrote:

- quote -

I don't think we know that. The OP said the Add was for reading. You surmised
"To say your "add is +100" doesn't tell us much if we don't know what
distance it's calculated for. I'd guess you held the book about 50 cm".


- quote -

Right. He shouldn't need computer glasses.

- quote -

I have clients who look at the monitor for hours at a time, reporting an
average monitor distance of 24". They need and want crisp.

- quote -

I've found that this varies from one person to the other, probably related to
pupil diameter and maybe changes in the lens. A +2.50 Add client I saw yesterday
could see my monitor comfortably at 25". I didn't expect that- most people
struggle and have to tip their head back, shocked at how much clearer the text
looks when +1.50 is placed over the glasses. Her reaction was the opposite, not
much better with than without. Although she uses her computer a moderate amount
of time, I didn't recommend separate glasses because she was non-symptomatic and
comfortable with the existing quality of vision.

BTW, my office monitor is at 32", and unless I bump the font good and plenty I
see a lot of blur. My home monitor is at 25" and I don't even try to look at it
with my everyday glasses. (Add is +2.25 at 40cm.)


- quote -

Now, if we can only get urban drivers to recognize that an automobile isn't
their living room on wheels!

Robert Martellaro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Optician/Owner
Roberts Optical
Wauwatosa Wi.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself."
- Richard Feynman

"Robert Martellaro" <robopt[at]nospam.com> wrote

- quote -

But the doctor wrote +1.00 for 20 inches. That suggests the OP is 45 or
less, with considerable accommodation remaining.

Even at 53, I use +050 in my distance portion and VDTs are quite legible at
30 inches or so through that. Not "crisp" but not so blurry that I
habitually tilt back. Even when accommodation is gone, depth-of-field and
tolerance for blur allow a range.

MT > > IMO there's more danger in those 1/2-inch "fashion" temples that
California
- quote -

It interferes enormously looking over your shoulder to back up, and
obliterates the "corner of your eye" vision used for that 18-wheeler
sneaking up in your blind spot.

-MT

On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 08:57:19 -0600, "Mike Tyner" <mtyner[at]mindspring.com> wrote:

- quote -

True, but a half diopter is a room distance lens, not a computer lens. Or as Jon
Stewart might say, it's more like a gratuity, and a cheap one at that.

Kidding aside, the "office" type lenses made by Zeiss and other companies put
about 50% to 70% of the Add on the distance gaze. Because I don't start
thinking about computer glasses until the Add is above +1.75 (assuming typical
work distances and healthy eyes), that places anywhere from one, to as much as
one and a half diopters of plus on the distance, more than enough to cause
blurring of road signs and other distance objects.

To the OP:

If the +1.00 Add was for about 40cm, then you should have enough reserve
accommodation to see the screen comfortably and clearly at 70cm when you look
through the distance portion of the glasses, or without glasses if there is no
distance Rx, sans accommodative or vergence dysfunctions.

- quote -

I didn't know that. Most folks don't seem to ever look in their mirrors anyways.

In Texas, you can keep a loaded gun under the seat or in your pocket, pull up to
a drive up window and buy a bottle of Jack, and until a few years ago, you could
drink it and drive, as long as you were not "impaired".

Robert Martellaro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Optician/Owner
Roberts Optical
Wauwatosa Wi.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself."
- Richard Feynman

On Jan 25, 12:56*pm, Mike
<turnpike_user[at]turnpike_REMOVEuser.THIScomANDTHIS> wrote:
- quote -

For most people an add of +1.00, if over the distance Rx should be
clear at 70cm, clear out to 1M. Return to your optometrist with the
distance to your computer in hand and have him work out the add in
space with hand held lenses. You obviously have eyes that don't react
in the usual way.

Dr Judy

"Mark A" <nobody[at]nowhere.com> wrote

- quote -

I'm sure you're right about what it says, but a half diopter of blur doesn't
normally reduce vision to 20/40, even at night, so there are people driving
lawfully with worse vision than you get from a little extra plus.

IMO there's more danger in those 1/2-inch "fashion" temples that California
outlawed in 1959.

-MT

In message <3uGdnfI8Hpcq3AfanZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d[at]giganews.comat 14:06:21 on Fri, 25 Jan 2008, Mike Tyner <mtyner[at]mindspring.comwrote
- quote -

--
Mike News

- quote -

Probably because your eyes have gotten a bit weaker, and you really need a
new Rx with additional power in the distance area (which the computer
glasses give you).

If you look at Zeiss informational material (or any other vendor who sells
computer glasses) they are quite clear (no pun intended) that computer
glasses are not for driving (because the lens does not contain a viewing
area with your distance Rx).

On Jan 25, 9:47*pm, "Mike Tyner" <mty...[at]mindspring.com> wrote:
- quote -

So do I. My Zeiss computer glasses are more comfortable than my other
pair that's supposed to provided me the needed 20/20 for driving.