Quote:
Originally Posted by Xist
The next time that I use my sister's laptop, I will post the picture of the SUV in which she was riding a year ago that rolled over. All of us have seen pictures like that and even rolled-over vehicles, but safety equipment probably saved her life. Subaru keeps promoting their anti-collision systems and other manufacturers are working on them. Had the car stopped itself and slapped the driver, that might have been an uneventful day for everyone.
She felt that she needed an SUV to protect her kids, only to see how the high center of gravity works out. People want large vehicles to protect themselves from everyone else and with weight on their side and the safety equipment, they drive offensively.
Don't rugby players experience fewer injuries than U.S. football players, even though they have far less, if any, safety equipment?
|
I used to walk to school 2 miles, then cycle when I was old enough. These days parents are worried that their children would be vulnerable with all those cars about, but half the cars on the road at that time of day are parents taking their kids to school.
There's evidence that countries which make cycle helmets mandatory have more cycling injuries than countries where helmets are not usually worn. (Helmets are good for very young kids though.)
Improving safety is not usually a matter of throwing lots of new technology at a situation, although of course you can make a lot of money out of selling expensive safety kit to fearful people. Less easy to make money out of things like good safety advice, education, legislation to lower speed limits, building dedicated cycle lanes and so on.