Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site gatech.CSNET
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!gatech!jeff
From: jeff@gatech.CSNET (Jeff Lee)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.legal
Subject: Re: Seat Belts
Message-ID: <699@gatech.CSNET>
Date: Tue, 30-Jul-85 16:40:14 EDT
Article-I.D.: gatech.699
Posted: Tue Jul 30 16:40:14 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 1-Aug-85 05:33:54 EDT
References: <316@baylor.UUCP> <145@batman.UUCP> <2193@amdcad.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: School of Information and Computer Science, Georgia Tech, Atlanta
Lines: 25
Xref: linus net.politics:9499 net.legal:1552

In article <2193@amdcad.UUCP>, phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) writes:
> In article <145@batman.UUCP> gene@batman.UUCP (Gene Mutschler) writes:
> >> An alternate solution to heavy seat-belt laws:
> >> 
> >> Insurance companies stop paying for injuries that would have been prevented
> >> by wearing a seatbelt. 
> >> 
> >> Any legal objections? Anybody out there with the pull to support this?
> >> -- 
> >thing was proposed as an alternative.  It got shot down primarily by
> >practical considerations--If a non-seat belt user was in an accident, it
> >was pointed out, all they had to do (assuming they were conscious),
> >was to quickly buckle up their belts before the dust settled.
> 
> I believe that if a seat belt user is involved in an accident, the selt
> belt will stretch enough that investigators can easily tell the selt belt
> has been through an accident.

This is true. If fact, If you are in a moderately severe accident it is
recommended (at least by consumer reports) that you replace your seatbelts
because they cannot absorb a second shock as well and could possibly fail.
-- 
Jeff Lee
CSNet:	Jeff @ GATech		ARPA:	Jeff%GATech.CSNet @ CSNet-Relay.ARPA
uucp:	...!{akgua,allegra,hplabs,ihnp4,linus,seismo,ulysses}!gatech!jeff