Ban may not be effective" would not be convenient

TO THE EDITOR:

The author of Tuesday's response to an editorial concerning the banning of drive-through windows in Orange County (""Drive-through editorial lacked critical thinking"" March 2) raised an interesting notion that I would like to continue to think critically"" about.

The author seems to feel that banning drive-throughs in Orange County is a gosh-darn great idea — a given" even" to those who are graced with the ability to ""think critically"" as he is.

With my Critical Thinking Cap on, everything becomes clearer. Hmm … how could anyone possibly drive to Wendy's, order their food inside and then drive back?

That commute couldn't possibly matter. Obviously, dropping drive-throughs would make a significant impact on the amount of total environmental damage everyone does on a Wendy's run. No question about it. Case closed.

When I take off my Cap, it somehow becomes much less clear to me whether or not we can be perfectly sure if the improvements in sustainability that this measure might cause could outweigh the loss of convenience that would certainly come as a result.

What's more, I'm a little offended that the author appears to suggest that my thoughts, as contrary to his, might earn me a place in the Non-Critical Thinker"" category"" along with everyone else who has similar questions about the effectiveness of such a ban.

It seems to me that implying a sweeping generalization like that involves less ""critical thinking"" than questioning the vitriolic nature of a drive-through window.

But" then again maybe I am just simple-minded.


Jordan Seal
Sophomore
Business