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).