Re: Airbags vs seatbelts

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ California Scuba Diving BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Jason on March 12, 2001 at 17:25:16:

In Reply to: We did this way for years... posted by JRM on March 12, 2001 at 14:21:32:

JRM - there is good reason for insisting on safety equipment in the car:
seat belts - no doubt
crumple zones - more damage in small accidents, but good in big ones
antilock brakes - in most conditions, can get 90% of optimal
braking and still steer.

but airbags? Those are effectively bombs, designed to protect
an unbelted 170lb man. Because we are now stuck with them,
children have to sit in the back, and small women are in great
danger of death, or substantial injury. Air bags may
have save a few thousand people, total, for a cost of hundreds
of millions or even billions by now. They cost an extra
3-4k to fix after an accident, and have killed 150 passengers.
Nevermind all the broken arms, and other parts. A friend ended
up with her necklace branded into her neck for a good while.

Not worth the gains, in my mind. The seat belt does nearly all
of the protection by itself, with virtually no downsides.

Back to scuba - the BC, the SPG, and the digital BT/computer
have all been big improvements. But the other stuff seems
more like ways of taking your money, rather than improvement.
I like the old fins (Jetfins for me), and I don't see a need for
a heads up display computer should Cochran ever actually deliver it.

Wetsuits/drysuits are also much better now, I'd say, and with
more color choices!

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup




[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ California Scuba Diving BBS ] [ FAQ ]