Gawnsoft wrote:
On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 20:08:54 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote (more or less):

Paul Dicken wrote:
Mention of Mayer Hillman reminded me of a view he expressed in a
meeting I attended. He suggested all car bumpers should be made of
glass and drivers seated on them. His view was that standards of
driving will go up immediately.

... because people driving in a vulnerable vehicle would drive more
safely?

There is a big difference between 'more safely' and 'absolutely
safely'.

People drive less safely with seatbelts than they do without
seatbelts == People drive more safely without seatbelts than they
do with seatbelts. people never have accidents when driving
without a seatbelt.

I assume that means "not that"; please write in English. Are you
suggesting that we should abandon seat belts in order that we should
drive more safely?

That idea didn't seem to work before seat belts were invented,
when occupants used to die by being ejected through the windscreen.
Indeed it still happens. We've all read stories of late-night
crashes where a carful of young people were killed or injured
after they were thrown from their car, presumably because they
were too drunk or high to remember to put on their seat belts.

You seem to be mixing up 'drive more safely' with 'never have
accidents at all', and conflating severity of accident with
risk-taking while driving.

Well, severity of accident is part of the safety equation. My point was
that before seat belts were introduced, there were very many disastrous
accidents because many people *didn't* drive safely enough to avoid
being thrown through the windscreen. Overall, driving with belts is
safer than it used to be, i.e. it kills fewer people.

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)