On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 09:43:35 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote (more or less):

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.

Are you
suggesting that we should abandon seat belts in order that we should
drive more safely?
....
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.

And people drive /less/ safely than that now. It's just that a great
deal of the risk has been transferred to others.

Overall, driving with belts is
safer than it used to be, i.e. it kills fewer people.

Is, perhaps counter-intuitively to you, not true.

I assume that means "not that"; please write in English.

To be exact, it means 'is not equal to'. But your inference in
context works perfectly well.

I'll continue to use arithmetic and logic symbols in my posts.

--
Cheers,
Euan
Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122
Smalltalk links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk) http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk