Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 SMI; site sun.uucp
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!decwrl!sun!alan
From: alan@sun.uucp (Alan Marr, Sun Graphics)
Newsgroups: net.auto,net.legal
Subject: Re: Seatbelts for passengers
Message-ID: <2625@sun.uucp>
Date: Wed, 14-Aug-85 02:58:51 EDT
Article-I.D.: sun.2625
Posted: Wed Aug 14 02:58:51 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 18-Aug-85 03:19:54 EDT
References: <535@brl-tgr.ARPA> <870@mtuxo.UUCP> <639@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Reply-To: alan@sun.UUCP (Alan Marr, Sun Graphics)
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Lines: 18
Xref: watmath net.auto:7683 net.legal:2088


Re: seat belt laws:
> the rationale for their
> always including passengers instead of simply specifying the driver
> alone is not clear and has not been explained by anyone, as far as I see.

Passengers in the interior of the car who caroom into the driver
will interfere her/his ability to maintain control after a
primary impact and hopefully avoid a secondary impact, possibly
with oncoming traffic.

Speaking of secondary impacts, air bags are a kludge.  They do
not protect you from secondary impacts (because they deflate),
they do not protect you from sideways impacts, the accumulated
dust and debris flies into the face of the driver just when his
vision must not be obscured, the bags themselves interfere
with the control of the car, and they encourage people to not
use a more effective mechanism (their seatbelts).