On Dec 2, 6:26 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 23:15:42 -0000, wrote:
On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 13:30:30 -0500, Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

I find it hard to believe that insurance companies, who actually know
the cost, would promote anything that would cost them more money. If
seat belts and helmets were not safer, insurance companies would
aggressively fight against the laws.

The push for mandatory seat belt laws didn't come from insurance
companies, it came from the auto industry. In 1984, the Secretary of
Transportation ruled that air bags would not be required if more than 2/3
of the population resided in states with mandatory seat belt laws. All
of a sudden, Detroit began lobbying for mandatory seat belt laws. It's
not about safety, it's about money.

And then we got air bags anyway which caused a zillion injuries and
still do.

Not to mention severe allergic reactions as a result of the powder
used as a lubricant to aid inflation.

And I have yet to have an SAE qualified engineer tell me why, if seat
belts are so effective in reducing injuries, we need air bags as
additional restraints.

Simple. Whiplash and other spinal injuries are reduced.
http://www.spineuniverse.com/display...rticle835.html

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that the
combination of an air bag in addition to a lap and shoulder belt
reduces the risk of serious head injury by 81 percent, compared with
60 percent reduction for belts alone.