Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site kitc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!spuxll!kitc!jeb
From: jeb@kitc.UUCP (Jim Beckman)
Newsgroups: net.auto
Subject: Good seatbelt suggestion
Message-ID: <208@kitc.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 1-Oct-85 09:43:09 EDT
Article-I.D.: kitc.208
Posted: Tue Oct  1 09:43:09 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 3-Oct-85 07:26:16 EDT
Distribution: net
Organization: AT&T-IS Labs, So. Plainfield NJ
Lines: 27

<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>
Finally an original and workable suggestion for the seatbelt usage
controversy!
>
>The penalty should be simple, but direct - a small fine, but allow
>the insurance companies to charge double on the personal-injury-protection
>rates if you've had a seatbelt violation in the past n years (n=~=3).
>(Personal Injury Protection is part of NJ's so-called no-fault insurance.)
>
>## Bill Stewart, AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ 1-201-949-0705 ihnp4!ho95c!wcs
>
My opinions:  If we're going to have a seatbelt usage law, the police
should be allowed to enforce it at any time.  Having a specific standard
to judge whether or not a person is a "seatbelt user" (ie. no seatbelt
tickets ~= being a seatbelt user) makes it simple for the insurance
companies to raise the appropriate rates for those who choose not to
wear their belts.  The insurance companies will raise my rates if I
am caught speeding, on the assumption that a habitual speeder is an
unsafe driver and thus more of a risk to the insurance company.  Is
there any real difference between that situation and Bill's
suggestion?  A non-user of belts increases the comanies risk due
to the predictably greater medical expenses incurred when the insured
driver is injured in an accident.  Can anyone offer any arguments
against this?

Jim Beckman   AT&T-IS, South Plainfield, NJ   kitc!jeb


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com