Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 (Fortune 01.1b1); site graffiti.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!shell!graffiti!peter
From: peter@graffiti.UUCP (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: net.consumers
Subject: Re: But at what cost...
Message-ID: <221@graffiti.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 21-Sep-85 09:20:23 EDT
Article-I.D.: graffiti.221
Posted: Sat Sep 21 09:20:23 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 25-Sep-85 09:29:27 EDT
References: <388@decwrl.UUCP> <354@mecc.UUCP>
Organization: The Power Elite, Houston, TX
Lines: 22

> Maybe connect the
> sensors to the electronic car radio?  A few circuits in the radio can be
> the controller..and bothersome noises can be emitted through the radio
> speakers.  People like radio in the car, so they'd tend to not disconnect
> the speakers.  What about people who want their own audio system instead
> of standard radio?

How about requiring the belt to be fastened for the radio, A/C, and so on to
work?

> 2) Passive belts as a cheaper replacement to airbags.  Passive belts don't
> look as nice as airbags.  But would that be enough inducement for people
> to spend more for airbags?  I doubt it.

Passive belts give me the willies. They're attached to the *door* instead of
the car frame. What sort of safetey device is that? I can see it now: car goes
crunch, doors fly open, passenger flies out.

But why go to all this trouble. If someone doesn't wear his or her seatbelt
let them fight it out with the insurance company. Even the potential for legal
hassles in the event of an accident will be enough to make most people buckle
up.


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com