Another Cirrus BRS deployment:

On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 17:32:51 -0700, "Tom Sixkiller"
wrote:

Actually, (IIRC), there was a surge in people thinking themselves
invincible
when seatbelts started becoming commonplace in cars (1960's).

John Ousterhout wrote:
Could you please cite a source for this dubious "fact".

Tom SIxkiler wrote:
Common talk back in the 60's; TV ad promo's.

You know, things did happen before you were born and before there was an
internet. :~)

I did not ask for a hyperlink, nor did I imply that an Internet source
was required. You may cite a newspaper or magazine if you wish.
However "common talk" is unacceptable and you know it. Had you asked
for corroboration and received "common talk" as an answer, I would
expect you to reply "bull****".

- J.O.-

"John Ousterhout"
wrote in message ...
On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 17:32:51 -0700, "Tom Sixkiller"
wrote:

Actually, (IIRC), there was a surge in people thinking themselves
invincible
when seatbelts started becoming commonplace in cars (1960's).

John Ousterhout wrote:
Could you please cite a source for this dubious "fact".

Tom SIxkiler wrote:
Common talk back in the 60's; TV ad promo's.

You know, things did happen before you were born and before there was an
internet. :~)

I did not ask for a hyperlink, nor did I imply that an Internet source
was required. You may cite a newspaper or magazine if you wish.
However "common talk" is unacceptable and you know it. Had you asked
for corroboration and received "common talk" as an answer, I would
expect you to reply "bull****".

Why don't you go screw yourself, punk.

John Ousterhout opined

On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 00:18:54 -0700, "Tom Sixkiller"
wrote:

Did you also acuse pilots of flying carelessly once they had seat
belts?

Actually, (IIRC), there was a surge in people thinking themselves invincible
when seatbelts started becoming commonplace in cars (1960's).

Could you please cite a source for this dubious "fact".

- J.O.-

There is documentation for a simular effect. In the mid-80s Maggie Thatcher
mandated seatbelt usage in England. There was a drop in driver and passenger
deaths. There was also an increase in pedestrian and cyclist deaths. What was
not included in the New Scientist article was the net change in deaths.

It is strongly suggested that safety devices change operator behavior. See
also "moral hazard" and insurance.t



-ash
Cthulhu for President!
Why vote for a lesser evil?

Ash,

There was a drop in driver and passenger
deaths. There was also an increase in pedestrian and cyclist deaths.


Yes? So? What's the correlation?

There is a steady decline in both the number of newborn babies in
Germany and the number of storks living here. Is that proof for the
traditional belief that storks bring the babies?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas Borchert opined

Ash,

There was a drop in driver and passenger
deaths. There was also an increase in pedestrian and cyclist deaths.


Yes? So? What's the correlation?

Change in law, deaths inside cars go down with increased seatbelt usage as
expected. But there was an increase in deaths outside of cars at the same
time.

Sounds like a correlation to me.

There is a steady decline in both the number of newborn babies in
Germany and the number of storks living here. Is that proof for the
traditional belief that storks bring the babies?

It's a correlation.

There is a difference. There is no theory to tie storks and babies together.
There is a reason to tie seatbelt usage ( _and other safety devices_ ) to
changes in death rates. Insurance changes behaviour.



-ash
Cthulhu for President!
Why vote for a lesser evil?