Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site h-sc1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!h-sc1!desjardins
From: desjardins@h-sc1.UUCP (marie desjardins)
Newsgroups: net.auto,net.flame,net.kids,net.singles
Subject: Re: Seat belts
Message-ID: <299@h-sc1.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 24-Apr-85 12:51:20 EST
Article-I.D.: h-sc1.299
Posted: Wed Apr 24 12:51:20 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 26-Apr-85 23:28:12 EST
References: <429@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP> <335@calmasd.UUCP> <1299@drusd.UUCP> <104@daisy.UUCP>
Organization: Harvard Univ. Science Center
Lines: 26
Xref: linus net.auto:5437 net.flame:8563 net.kids:1114 net.singles:5802

> Sure.  Then I suppose we should outlaw car radios because they are distracting

They keep you awake (at least they do me) -> they have some worth.

> And we should outlaw comfortable car seats because you might fall asleep.  

They keep your attention on the road, rather than fidgeting around trying
to adjust them -> worth.

> And we should surely outlaw heterosexual drivers because they account for 
> about ninety percent of all accidents.  

I won't even bother.

> Better yet, since plane travel is so much safer than car travel, why not 
> ban cars entirely?  Or at least ban night travel.

No, I don't think I'll bother with that either.

What is the use of NOT wearing a seatbelt?  (At least a comfortable one,
granted many are not.)

I would think with all the arguments against seat-belt laws, you could find 
a few intelligent ones, but I guess that's too much to ask.

	marie desjardins