jeb@eisx.UUCP (Jim Beckman) (04/29/85)
<> Stipulated: I always wear my seatbelts. People who don't wear seatbelts are stupid. Stupidity is no crime. I believe the government should let individuals go to hell in their own handbaskets if that is what they want. The issue of what laws the government should (or shouldn't) pass to protect us from ourselves is a bigger issue than just seatbelts. We can argue the larger question, but Uncle has so far been unshakeable in the position that the people WILL BE PROTECTED. The only choice that we have any hope of making for ourselves is HOW. The options: seatbelts or airbags. The advantages of seatbelts are much better protection at much lower cost. Airbags have the advantage that they offer limited protection even for comatose drivers. My problem is that I don't want to be forced to pay several hundred dollars extra for a car for the privilege of having an explosive device behind the dashboard that will probably be an actual detriment to my safety in the event of a crash (given that I will be wearing the lap and shoulder belts when it happens). Advertising for Mercedes implies that airbags are available (as options?) in some of their models. However, all their ads carefully refer to the bags as SUPPLEMENTAL restraint systems. The people are assumed to be wearing a lap belt at all times. My question is how to let the lazy, thoughtless, or just plain stupid drivers escape the confines of seatbelts for the joys of airbag ownership, while letting me keep the protection I want without paying for other people's choices. Or should we actually be fighting over the larger question? Jim Beckman AT&T-ISL, South Plainfield, NJ eisx!jeb
ark@alice.UUCP (Andrew Koenig) (04/30/85)
> The issue of what laws the government should (or shouldn't) pass > to protect us from ourselves is a bigger issue than just > seatbelts. We can argue the larger question, but Uncle > has so far been unshakeable in the position that the people > WILL BE PROTECTED. The only choice that we have any hope > of making for ourselves is HOW. The options: seatbelts > or airbags. You don't know the half of it. There is a third choice: both at once. For instance, the NJ seat belt law was carefully crafted so it does not meet the Federal requirements for a "mandatory seat belt law."
mrh@aluxz.UUCP (HUDOCK) (04/30/85)
> The issue of what laws the government should (or shouldn't) pass > to protect us from ourselves is a bigger issue than just > seatbelts. We can argue the larger question, but Uncle > has so far been unshakeable in the position that the people > WILL BE PROTECTED. The only choice that we have any hope > of making for ourselves is HOW. The options: seatbelts > or airbags. > I agree Jim, so many people out there in netland believe the govt. should protect us from the "ERECTION TO THE RESSURECTION" I dont believe HOW to be our only choice. Had people only asked HOW in TJ's days, the HORSE BELT LAW would have passed in the continental congress.