Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site sphinx.UChicago.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!whuxl!houxm!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!mmar
From: mmar@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Mitchell Marks)
Newsgroups: net.auto,net.legal
Subject: Re: Seatbelts for passengers
Message-ID: <987@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 16-Aug-85 02:02:50 EDT
Article-I.D.: sphinx.987
Posted: Fri Aug 16 02:02:50 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 18-Aug-85 04:18:14 EDT
References: <535@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Organization: U Chicago -- Linguistics Dept
Lines: 25
Xref: watmath net.auto:7692 net.legal:2091

Yes, it's an interesting point -- inclusion of front-seat passenger in the
seat-belt law shows that the underlying rationale must be just "save you
from injuries in accident" and not "prevent accident (and harm to others)
by improving driver's control".

Illinois just recently adopted a seat-belt law, and I can't say I'm very
happy about it.  I end up with people honking at me to get moving, because
I stop to buckle up only after all the twisting and turning involved in
un-parking.

All the same, I'd like to propose another rationale in favor of the law, one
which isn't respectable enough to make it as an official reason, but which
is ultimately the real reason why I'm fer the law more than agin it.  All in
all, I would rather wear a belt and be safe.  But (before the law) I would
often feel silly -- like a nerdo wimp, you might say  -- or else, when a 
passenger, feel like I'm insulting the driver.  "I'd better get this belt
on quick, 'cause I know you're gonna crash us."  Okay, so with the law
in place all these second thoughts and strange projections can just
evaporate.  "Hell man, like, y'know I'm tough enough to ride without
the belt -- but now there's this law, so I guess I'll go along with
it.  Ain't that I think you're a bad driver, amigo."
-- 

            -- Mitch Marks @ UChicago 
               ...ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!mmar