On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 09:12:18 +0100, rnet[dot]co[dot]uk
(Simon Gardner) wrote:

In article ,
"Mary Fisher" wrote:

I am living proof that seat belts are not always safer

I'm living proof that they sometimes are.

Safer for whom? Nobody doubts that they increase the safety of the driver.
In what sense are you the "living proof" that they increase the safety of
anyone else rather than decrease it?


This is all very fine and large, Simon, and I can appreciate your
statistical arguments, but to be honest I don't know that many people,
who when push comes to shove would knowlingly put themselves in a
position of increased danger on the road to the benefit of others.

I'm talking of Mr Average Motorist here, rather than perhaps emergency
services and others who might do that from choice.

With these specifics taken out of the equation, it doesn't strike me
that most people would go unbelted on the argument that it is safer
for the other guy. I can see the logic, but it is
counter-intiuitive,

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl