"Bruce L. Bergman" <blnospambergman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:dm8c14hmqig5gkrkfnpsa5bluqmknje8t0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 08:45:06 -0700, "ScottM" <no@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> An aquaintance and friend of a friend lost her life about 3 years ago
>>> in a very minor traffic incident in Toronto when the bag went off and
>>> broke her neck. She was only 4'11" - and could NOT get an exemption to
>>> allow her to have the bag disconnected. Her death has made it possible
>>> for shorter drivers to LEGALLY have air bags dissabled in Ontario now.
>>> There was NO VISIBLE EXTERNAL DAMAGE to her car, and according to
>>> investigators it did not go off "prematurely" It was just a fluke that
>>> it went off - but the results were predictable given her size.
>>>
>>> I don't think air bags and antilock brakes, along with miriad other
>>> so-called"features" on today's cars should be mandated as standard
>>> equipment - or even encouraged as "recommended" equipment.
>>> People should learn to drive - - - - -.
>>> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com
**
>>
>>So you can get thrown in jail for disabling your own airbag in your own
>>car?
>
> No, but the automakers want to make it non-trivial to disconnect
> them. You can if you have a good reason, and you sign a form stating
> you are doing it on your own.
>
> The automakers don't want to disconnect them, and then get sued by
> your heirs and estate for the fatal accident where the airbags did NOT
> go off... Doesn't matter that you wanted the airbags disabled, if
> they do it (or even allow it) and can't prove your intent, they could
> lose big damage awards.
>
>>Thats BS, kinda like seat belt tickets and helmet laws.
>
> Actually, there is a compelling reason to require basic safety
> measures: Because when you get in the accident without seatbelts, or
> dump a bike and center-punch an Audi without a helmet on, the medical
> response teams can often save people who would have been by all rights
> better off left to die - because even though you have been saved, now
> you are a vegetable. Or a quad on a ventilator, or other nasty
> outcome.
>
> And when you run out of money and/or insurance (which in some cases
> is immediate, and in others doesn't take long) you are now a 'ward of
> the State' and Medicare/SSI Disability and Medi-Cal (or other state
> programs) will continue to care for you till you finally pass to your
> final judgment, all on the State's dime. And that means from the
> taxpayers pockets, you and me.
>
> If it was only as simple as the Biker's Credo to "Live Fast, Die
> Young and Leave a good looking corpse" it wouldn't be a problem. But
> they often don't leave a corpse, but a drooling sack of potatoes that
> will spend another 25 - 40 years in a hospital bed...
>
I'll have to disagree on the helmet law thing, I think more often you'll
end
up dead without it. You hit your head on something in a motorcycle
accident
without a helmet I think its a given your brains wont stay in your skull.
With the helmet you break your back or neck and and that's when you end up
completly disabled.
AND, to tell you the truth I don't really care either way, I don't think
its
right to mandate such things. BTW, you ever take a good look at the
"helmets" most of the cruiser riders wear? Not much more then a 1/8" thick
piece of plastic with a 1/4" piece of foam in it. FAR from DOT, and nobody
inforces the law anyway. They are just faking it. Waist of
time..................I shouldn't of said any of this, its just gonna make
this thread go on forever......:) Oh hell why not.....>>>As far as the
other stuff goes, lawyers have done a whole lot of damage to the great
country of the USA....... soooo many sue happy pricks! as for the smoking,
just goes to show you the government will let you do anything "unsafe" as
long as you pay them enough money (taxes) for it. Why don't they outlaw
s**** wrangling and skydiving? ok ,I'm done. :)
|
