[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: driver's ed. is a joke



jd (video@3DRESEARCH.nauticom.net) wrote:
: In article <3ugh5r$r8l@ceylon.gte.com>
: Jeff Witzer <muthiah@sunflash.eng.usf.edu> writes:

: > So...hows about the auto insurance industry setting up safety equiptment
: > users schedules seperate from non-safety equiptment users like life
: > insurance companies do for smokers and non-smokers?  Drivers would
: > volunteer their safety/non-safety status and be charged appropriate
: > rates (non-safety being much higher due to the insurance companies'
: > higer risk of payout).  The liars (those who claim to use but really
: > don't) would not be covered for ANY claims caused by an accident in
: > which it can be proven they were not using the appropriate safety
: > equiptment.

: They already do. You can get discounts for anti-lock barkes and
: airbags.

Ah, but I believe he's referring to *users* of safety equipment.  I thought I
just read a statistic that said up to 80% of drivers do not properly operate
ABS.  As for air bags, I know a few people that stopped using seat belts
because they have air bags, and one driver I know (ok, so this is extreme) now
doesn't feel as bad about driving drunk because his car has air bags.

There's a very important distinction here; just because people have safety
equipment in their cars (seatbelts, ABS), they don't necessarily use them
(although you can't really "not" use airbags).

James McElroy
jmcelroy@wpi.edu
National Motorists Association



References: