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