Jim has identified the underlying problem here. Even those of us who favor a
federally mandated (required) metrication may not agree on the details as to
exactly what specific things that mandate would require to be metric, or how
it would need to be metric (soft versus hard, for example).
Even our friend Andy Johnson agreed that Congress can not and should not
require an individual in his or her own home workshop to measure pieces of
wood in metric when he or she is building a book shelf for his or her own
private use in the home. Andy went so far as to say such a thing was
ridiculous. So, starting there, we can find many other examples, each one a
little less "private" than the previous one. The question becomes, exactly
where is the line to be drawn between which things are OK for federal
mandated metric and which not?
I think the difference between Jim Elwell and Andy Johnson may be more in
that matter (of where to draw the dividing line) than it is in the basic
need for federal legislation. (However, I suspect they would both disagree
with my thinking on this latter point.)
Regards,
Bill Hooper
> From: "Jim Elwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [USMA:13155] Re: Pulling Together (was Jim Elwell on wrong list)
>
> Perhaps we need to back off and clarify a few things so we are all on the
> same page.
>
> What do the list members want a metric mandate to do?
