Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: $Revision: 1.6.2.16 $; site inmet.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!cca!inmet!nrh
From: nrh@inmet.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Orphaned Response
Message-ID: <7800874@inmet.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 3-Jan-86 21:36:00 EST
Article-I.D.: inmet.7800874
Posted: Fri Jan  3 21:36:00 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 5-Jan-86 20:46:35 EST
References: <294@frog.UUCP>
Lines: 22
Nf-ID: #R:frog:-29400:inmet:7800874:177600:800
Nf-From: inmet!nrh    Jan  3 21:36:00 1986


>/* Written  4:43 pm  Dec 21, 1985 by abc@brl-tgr in inmet:net.politics */
>
>The New York seat belt law is estimated to have saved over 170 lives
>already.  Does this count?
>/* End of text from inmet:net.politics */
>

Of course!  On the other hand, it's annoyed a lot of other people, and
cost them money.  Does that count?

Before you react with: "But even ONE human life is worth an awful lot
of annoyance", consider this:

Lowering the speed limit to 15 mph would save MORE lives.

In other words, there is clearly a trade off between convenience and
risk -- and they must be balanced against each other.

I'm told that highway designers routinely assign a money value to human 
life so that they may design highways that are not infinitely safe.  Does
anyone happen to know what this value is?