Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watmum.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watnot!watmum!tjsmedley
From: tjsmedley@watmum.UUCP (Trevor J. Smedley)
Newsgroups: net.auto
Subject: air(wind)bags
Message-ID: <370@watmum.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 21-Jan-86 13:58:55 EST
Article-I.D.: watmum.370
Posted: Tue Jan 21 13:58:55 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 22-Jan-86 04:25:44 EST
Reply-To: tjsmedley@watmum.UUCP (Trevor J. Smedley)
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 34

O.K. So we've all been reading stuff about airbags now for God knows
how long. It's about time we had a summary of the arguments so far.

pro: They'll save your life in certain situations.

con: A seatbelt is enough.

pro: No it isn't.

con: They cost money.

pro: It's worth it.

con: They'll go off when I don't want them to and cause an accident.

pro: No they won't.

con: A car with airbags won't have seatbelts.

pro: Yes it will.

I am, at the moment, neither pro nor con for the simple reason that I
am not properly informed on the subject. All the "Yes it is! - No it
isn't!" type discussion will never convince me in either direction.
What would convince me is a published study by some independent firm
on such things as reliability, effectiveness, ... I would like to
propose that any further discussion on the topic of airbags be limited
to references (and possibly quotes) from published material on the
subject. I am afraid of net.auto disappearing because of the high
volume and redundancy.

Trevor J. Smedley                    University of Waterloo

{decvax,allegra,ihnp4,clyde,utzoo}!watmum!tjsmedley