 | |
Do You Have A Glove Box?
Saab Saab Automobiles Discussions (alt.autos.saab)
 |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#51
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: Do You Have A Glove Box? -
11-09-2004
, 01:21 PM
|
Dave Hinz wrote: As they are here in the USA, yes. It has been made clear to people who bother to care that they won't help you much if at all, if you aren't where you're expected to be when they go off. I must have been misinformed in that case. |
Quote:
|
It was my understanding ( certainly when airbags were first considered in the USA ) that they were intended as a primary safety measure and were consequently larger than European versions. |
settle that), but they most definately never have been promoted as a primary
safety device here in the USA. That's not to say ignorant people who didn't
wear their seatbelts before airbags aren't also ignorantly not wearing their
seatbelts now, but that's a Darwinism situation more than anything else.
Dave Hinz
#52
| |||
| |||
|
|
Shane Almeida wrote: Yes, heaven forbid people take responsibility for their own actions instead of relying on the government to legislate what should be common sense. If it's clearly such common sense where do you have the problem with the gov't making the dimwits behave in an intelligent manner ? |
believe it should be the individual's responsibility to keep themselves
safe and the governments responsibility to make sure people have the
resources to do so.
Quote:
|
Maybe ppl should be 'free' to drive a car too without proving some level of competence by passing a test by your thinking ? |
drivers. Someone not wearing a seatbelt doesn't affect my safety at all.
#53
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 01:03:14 +0000, Pooh Bear wrote: If it's clearly such common sense where do you have the problem with the gov't making the dimwits behave in an intelligent manner ? I have a problem with the government making people protect themselves. I believe it should be the individual's responsibility to keep themselves safe and the governments responsibility to make sure people have the resources to do so. |
wearing a seatbelt. It's 2:00 AM. My pager goes off, and we roll say 3
firetrucks and the ambulance. Let's say 12-15 guys, tied up for 2
hours on a fast call, 3 hours on a bad one. Even in an area with volunteer
fire and EMS, that's not a cheap call, and it's paid for by the taxpayers.
If you had your seatbelt on, it would have been a towtruck call and I could
have stayed sleeping.
OK, so we get there. No seatbelt, and you've been bounced around inside
(and sometimes outside) of the car. Your cervical spine is broken. You
can't keep a job, so your bills become the state's bills. More expense for
the rest of us, based on your decision not to wear a seat belt.
Quote:
|
Maybe ppl should be 'free' to drive a car too without proving some level of competence by passing a test by your thinking ? Traffic laws and driving tests exist to protect me and you from other drivers. Someone not wearing a seatbelt doesn't affect my safety at all. |
their seatbelts caused a further accident. And it certainly can, and
does, effect your pocketbook.
Far as I'm concerned, it's unfortunate that the cops in this state aren't
allowed to pull people over for driving without seat belts. The law is
in place, but there has to be _another_ moving violation to tack that on to.
After a decade or so, scraping the idiots off the road gets pretty old.
#54
| |||
| |||
|
|
Shane Almeida wrote: On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 01:03:14 +0000, Pooh Bear wrote: If it's clearly such common sense where do you have the problem with the gov't making the dimwits behave in an intelligent manner ? I have a problem with the government making people protect themselves. I believe it should be the individual's responsibility to keep themselves safe and the governments responsibility to make sure people have the resources to do so. Yes, to a point. However, let's say you get in a car crash, and you aren't wearing a seatbelt. It's 2:00 AM. My pager goes off, and we roll say 3 firetrucks and the ambulance. Let's say 12-15 guys, tied up for 2 hours on a fast call, 3 hours on a bad one. Even in an area with volunteer fire and EMS, that's not a cheap call, and it's paid for by the taxpayers. If you had your seatbelt on, it would have been a towtruck call and I could have stayed sleeping. OK, so we get there. No seatbelt, and you've been bounced around inside (and sometimes outside) of the car. Your cervical spine is broken. You can't keep a job, so your bills become the state's bills. More expense for the rest of us, based on your decision not to wear a seat belt. Maybe ppl should be 'free' to drive a car too without proving some level of competence by passing a test by your thinking ? Traffic laws and driving tests exist to protect me and you from other drivers. Someone not wearing a seatbelt doesn't affect my safety at all. Not true. A reasonable scenario could be constructed where the lack of their seatbelts caused a further accident. And it certainly can, and does, effect your pocketbook. Far as I'm concerned, it's unfortunate that the cops in this state aren't allowed to pull people over for driving without seat belts. The law is in place, but there has to be _another_ moving violation to tack that on to. After a decade or so, scraping the idiots off the road gets pretty old. |
It's interesting that the States can make seatbelt use
mandatory but are forbidden to enforce the law. Yet
the FAA can require their use in aircraft and nobody
says a thing.
As an aircraft pilot, I feel naked if I don't have the
belt(s) in place.
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.