In article , Ed Huntress says...

Something is sure helping the situation. Here are the death rates/100MM
miles, per the US Dept. of Transportation:

1965 5.30
1970 4.85
1975 3.43
1980 3.35
1985 2.47
1990 2.08
1995 1.73
2000 1.53

(Transportation Indicators for Motor Vehicles and Airlines:
http://www.census.gov/statab/www/minihs.html) That's down from over 45 in
1909, BTW. g

Ah, statistics. Then you of *all* posters here should know that
there's a multitude of reasons for those numbers. Not all of
the reasons are related to helmets, airbags, and seatbelts.

Some of the reasons have to do with things that make cars work
better and faster.

http://www.priceless420.com/Pr020505shortstop1.jpg
http://www.priceless420.com/Pr020505shortstop2.jpg
http://www.priceless420.com/Pr020505shortstop3.jpg
http://www.priceless420.com/Pr020505shortstop4.jpg

Did all the nanny-state stuff save that guy's bacon?
I doubt it. It probably contributed to the crash,
because he felt invulnerable.

I'm going to guess that's an anecdote.

Probably (g) Interesting pictures though.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================