Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site uw-june Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!floyd!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!uw-june!emma From: emma@uw-june.UUCP Newsgroups: net.auto,net.politics Subject: Re: airbags Message-ID: <493@uw-june> Date: Wed, 29-Jun-83 22:24:44 EDT Article-I.D.: uw-june.493 Posted: Wed Jun 29 22:24:44 1983 Date-Received: Thu, 30-Jun-83 18:55:23 EDT References: <730@utcsstat.UUCP> Organization: U. Washington, Computer Sci Lines: 17 Air bags are more effective than seat belts in a single forward impact. In a secondary impact, side impact, rollover, or rear impact seat belts are more effective. Seat belt-shoulder harness combinations are more effective in all situations. Automatic seat belts, which include a shoulder harness in all cases I have ever heard of, are more effective than air bags but less than shoulder harnesses. My understanding is that in autos equipped with air bags the shoulder harness will be missing but the seat belt will remain (with no gongs or other reminders to buckle it). This is a classic example of the federal covernment compromising my safety for the benefit of some moron incapable of fitting tab 'A' in slot 'B', and charging me (estimates are in the range of $900.00) for the privilege. And frankly I resent it. -Joe P.